Untitled - Saigontre

EFFECTIVE
SUCCESSION
PLANNING
THIRD EDITION

This page intentionally left blank

EFFECTIVE
SUCCESSION
PLANNING
THIRD EDITION
Ensuring Leadership Continuity and
Building Talent from Within
William J. Rothwell
American Management Association
New York • Atlanta • Brussels • Chicago • Mexico City • San Francisco
Shanghai • Tokyo • Toronto • Washington, D.C.

Special discounts on bulk quantities of AMACOM books are
available to corporations, professional associations, and other
organizations. For details, contact Special Sales Department,
AMACOM, a division of American Management Association,
1601 Broadway, New York, NY 10019.
Tel.: 212-903-8316. Fax: 212-903-8083.
Web site: www.amacombooks.org
This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative
information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold with
the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering
legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or
other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent
professional person should be sought.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Rothwell, William J.
Effective succession planning : ensuring leadership continuity and
building talent from within / William J. Rothwell.— 3rd ed.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 0-8144-0842-7
1. Leadership. 2. Executive succession—United States. 3. Executive
ability. 4. Organizational effectiveness. I. Title.
HD57.7.R689 2005
658.4092—dc22
2004024908
2005 William J. Rothwell.
All rights reserved.
Printed in the United States of America.
This publication may not be reproduced,
stored in a retrieval system,
or transmitted in whole or in part,
in any form or by any means, electronic,
mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of AMACOM,
a division of American Management Association,
1601 Broadway, New York, NY 10019.
Printing number
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1

TO MY WIFE MARCELINA, MY DAUGHTER CANDICE,
MY SON FROILAN, AND MY GRANDSON ADEN

This page intentionally left blank

CONTENTS
List of Exhibits
Preface to the Third Edition
Acknowledgments
xiii
xvii
xxxi
Advance Organizer for This Book 1
PART I
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT SUCCESSION
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT 5
CHAPTER 1
What Is Succession Planning and Management? 7
Six Ministudies: Can You Solve These Succession Problems? 7
Defining Succession Planning and Management 10
Distinguishing Succession Planning and Management from
Replacement Planning, Workforce Planning, Talent Management,
and Human Capital Management 16
Making the Business Case for Succession Planning and Management 18
Reasons for a Succession Planning and Management Program 20
Best Practices and Approaches 30
Ensuring Leadership Continuity in Organizations 35
Summary 39
CHAPTER 2
Trends Influencing Succession Planning and Management 41
The Ten Key Trends 42
What Does All This Mean for Succession Planning and Management? 54
Summary 55
vii

viii
C ONTENTS
CHAPTER 3
Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach 56
Characteristics of Effective Programs 56
The Life Cycle of Succession Planning and Management Programs:
Five Generations 59
Identifying and Solving Problems with Various Approaches 69
Integrating Whole Systems Transformational Change and
Appreciative Inquiry into Succession: What Are These Topics,
and What Added Value Do They Bring? 76
Requirements for a Fifth-Generation Approach 78
Key Steps in a Fifth-Generation Approach 78
Summary 81
CHAPTER 4
Competency Identification and Values Clarification:
Keys to Succession Planning and Management 82
What Are Competencies? 82
How Are Competencies Used in Succession Planning and
Management? 83
Conducting Competency Identification Studies 84
Using Competency Models 85
New Developments in Competency Identification, Modeling, and
Assessment 85
Identifying and Using Generic and Culture-Specific Competency
Development Strategies to Build Bench Strength 86
What Are Values, and What Is Values Clarification? 87
How Are Values Used in Succession Planning and Management? 89
Conducting Values Clarification Studies 90
Using Values Clarification 91
Bringing It All Together: Competencies and Values 91
Summary 91
PART II
LAYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A SUCCESSION
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 93
CHAPTER 5
Making the Case for Major Change 95
Assessing Current Problems and Practices 95
Demonstrating the Need 101
Determining Organizational Requirements 108

Contents
ix
Linking Succession Planning and Management Activities to
Organizational and Human Resource Strategy 108
Benchmarking Best Practices and Common Business Practices in
Other Organizations 113
Obtaining and Building Management Commitment 114
The Key Role of the CEO in the Succession Effort 120
Summary 124
CHAPTER 6
Starting a Systematic Program 125
Conducting a Risk Analysis and Building a Commitment to Change 125
Clarifying Program Roles 126
Formulating a Mission Statement 130
Writing Policy and Procedures 136
Identifying Target Groups 138
Clarifying the Roles of the CEO, Senior Managers, and Others 142
Setting Program Priorities 143
Addressing the Legal Framework 145
Establishing Strategies for Rolling Out the Program 147
Summary 155
CHAPTER 7
Refining the Program 156
Preparing a Program Action Plan 156
Communicating the Action Plan 157
Conducting Succession Planning and Management Meetings 160
Training on Succession Planning and Management 164
Counseling Managers About Succession Planning Problems in Their
Areas 172
Summary 174
PART III
ASSESSING THE PRESENT AND THE FUTURE 177
CHAPTER 8
Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job
Performance 179
Identifying Key Positions 180
Three Approaches to Determining Work Requirements in Key
Positions 184
Using Full-Circle, Multirater Assessments 189

x
C ONTENTS
Appraising Performance and Applying Performance Management 192
Creating Talent Pools: Techniques and Approaches 195
Thinking Beyond Talent Pools 200
Summary 202
CHAPTER 9
Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual
Potential 203
Identifying Key Positions and Talent Requirements for the Future 203
Assessing Individual Potential: The Traditional Approach 210
The Growing Use of Assessment Centers and Portfolios 221
Summary 224
PART IV
CLOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL GAP’’: OPERATING
AND EVALUATING A SUCCESSION PLANNING AND
MANAGEMENT PROGRAM 225
CHAPTER 10
Developing Internal Successors 227
Testing Bench Strength 227
Formulating Internal Promotion Policy 232
Preparing Individual Development Plans 235
Developing Successors Internally 242
The Role of Leadership Development Programs 251
The Role of Coaching 252
The Role of Executive Coaching 253
The Role of Mentoring 253
The Role of Action Learning 255
Summary 256
CHAPTER 11
Assessing Alternatives to Internal Development 257
The Need to Manage for ‘‘Getting the Work Done’’ Rather than
‘‘Managing Succession’’ 257
Innovative Approaches to Tapping the Retiree Base 266
Deciding What to Do 268
Summary 270
CHAPTER 12
Using Technology to Support Succession Planning and
Management Programs 271
Defining Online and High-Tech Methods 271

Contents
xi
Where to Apply Technology Methods 276
How to Evaluate and Use Technology Applications 276
What Specialized Competencies Do Succession Planning and
Management Coordinators Need to Use These Applications? 289
Summary 290
CHAPTER 13
Evaluating Succession Planning and Management
Programs 291
What Is Evaluation? 291
What Should Be Evaluated? 292
How Should Evaluation Be Conducted? 295
Summary 306
CHAPTER 14
The Future of Succession Planning and Management 307
The Fifteen Predictions 308
Summary 329
APPENDIX I:
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Succession
Planning and Management 331
APPENDIX II:
Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management 337
Case 1: How Business Plans for Succession 337
Case 2: How Government Plans for Succession 341
Case 3: How a Nonprofit Organization Plans for Succession 354
Case 4: Small Business Case 360
Case 5: Family Business Succession 362
Case 6: CEO Succession Planning Case 363
Notes 367
What’s on the CD? 387
Index 391
About the Author 399

This page intentionally left blank

LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit P-1. Age Distribution of the U.S. Population, Selected Years,
1965–2025 xx
Exhibit P-2. U.S. Population by Age, 1965–2025 xxi
Exhibit P-3. The Organization of the Book xxv
Exhibit 1-1. How General Electric Planned the Succession 11
Exhibit 1-2. The Big Mac Succession 14
Exhibit 1-3. Demographic Information About Respondents to a 2004 Survey
on Succession Planning and Management: Industries 21
Exhibit 1-4. Demographic Information About Respondents to a 2004 Survey
on Succession Planning and Management: Size 21
Exhibit 1-5. Demographic Information About Respondents to a 2004 Survey
on Succession Planning and Management: Job Functions of
Respondents 22
Exhibit 1-6. Reasons for Succession Planning and Management Programs 23
Exhibit 1-7. Strategies for Reducing Turnover and Increasing Retention 26
Exhibit 1-8. Workforce Reductions Among Survey Respondents 29
Exhibit 1-9. A Summary of Best Practices on Succession Planning and
Management from Several Research Studies 31
Exhibit 2-1. An Assessment Questionnaire: How Well Is Your Organization
Managing the Consequences of Trends Influencing Succession
Planning and Management? 43
Exhibit 2-2. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 49
Exhibit 3-1. Characteristics of Effective Succession Planning and
Management Programs 60
Exhibit 3-2. Assessment Questionnaire for Effective Succession Planning
and Management 64
Exhibit 3-3. A Simple Exercise to Dramatize the Need for Succession
Planning and Management 67
Exhibit 3-4. The Dow Chemical Company’s Formula for Succession 70
Exhibit 3-5. Chief Difficulties with Succession Planning and Management
Programs 72
xiii

xiv
L IST OF E XHIBITS
Exhibit 3-6. The Seven-Pointed Star Model for Systematic Succession
Planning and Management 79
Exhibit 4-1. An Interview Guide to Collect Corporate-Culture-Specific
Competency Development Strategies 88
Exhibit 5-1. Strategies for Handling Resistance to Implementing Succession
Planning and Management 97
Exhibit 5-2. The Importance of Succession Planning and Management 98
Exhibit 5-3. Making Decisions About Successors (in Organizations Without
Systematic Succession Planning and Management) 99
Exhibit 5-4. A Questionnaire for Assessing the Status of Succession Planning
and Management in an Organization 102
Exhibit 5-5. A Worksheet for Demonstrating the Need for Succession
Planning and Management 106
Exhibit 5-6. An Interview Guide for Determining the Requirements for a
Succession Planning and Management Program 109
Exhibit 5-7. An Interview Guide for Benchmarking Succession Planning and
Management Practices 115
Exhibit 5-8. Opinions of Top Managers About Succession Planning and
Management 118
Exhibit 5-9. Opinions of Human Resource Professionals About Succession
Planning and Management 119
Exhibit 5-10. Actions to Build Management Commitment to Succession
Planning and Management 121
Exhibit 5-11. Rating Your CEO for His/Her Role in Succession Planning and
Management 123
Exhibit 6-1. A Model for Conceptualizing Role Theory 127
Exhibit 6-2. Management Roles in Succession Planning and Management:
A Grid 129
Exhibit 6-3. A Worksheet to Formulate a Mission Statement for Succession
Planning and Management 133
Exhibit 6-4. A Sample Succession Planning and Management Policy 137
Exhibit 6-5. Targeted Groups for Succession Planning and Management 139
Exhibit 6-6. An Activity for Identifying Initial Targets for Succession
Planning and Management Activities 140
Exhibit 6-7. An Activity for Establishing Program Priorities in Succession
Planning and Management 146
Exhibit 6-8. U.S. Labor Laws 148
Exhibit 7-1. A Worksheet for Preparing an Action Plan to Establish the
Succession Planning and Management Program 158
Exhibit 7-2. Sample Outlines for In-House Training on Succession Planning
and Management 168
Exhibit 8-1. A Worksheet for Writing a Key Position Description 186

List of Exhibits
xv
Exhibit 8-2. A Worksheet for Considering Key Issues in Full-Circle,
Multirater Assessments 191
Exhibit 8-3. The Relationship Between Performance Management and
Performance Appraisal 194
Exhibit 8-4. Approaches to Conducting Employee Performance Appraisal 197
Exhibit 8-5. A Worksheet for Developing an Employee Performance
Appraisal Linked to a Position Description 199
Exhibit 9-1. A Worksheet for Environmental Scanning 205
Exhibit 9-2. An Activity on Organizational Analysis 206
Exhibit 9-3. An Activity for Preparing Realistic Scenarios to Identify Future
Key Positions 208
Exhibit 9-4. An Activity for Preparing Future-Oriented Key Position
Descriptions 209
Exhibit 9-5. Steps in Conducting Future-Oriented ‘‘Rapid Results
Assessment’’ 211
Exhibit 9-6. How to Classify Individuals by Performance and Potential 214
Exhibit 9-7. A Worksheet for Making Global Assessments 216
Exhibit 9-8. A Worksheet to Identify Success Factors 217
Exhibit 9-9. An Individual Potential Assessment Form 218
Exhibit 10-1. A Sample Replacement Chart Format: Typical Succession
Planning and Management Inventory for the Organization 229
Exhibit 10-2. Succession Planning and Management Inventory by Position 230
Exhibit 10-3. Talent Shows: What Happens? 233
Exhibit 10-4. A Simplified Model of Steps in Preparing Individual
Development Plans (IDPs) 237
Exhibit 10-5. A Worksheet for Preparing Learning Objectives Based on
Individual Development Needs 239
Exhibit 10-6. A Worksheet for Identifying the Resources Necessary to
Support Developmental Experiences 241
Exhibit 10-7. A Sample Individual Development Plan 243
Exhibit 10-8. Methods of Grooming Individuals for Advancement 245
Exhibit 10-9. Key Strategies for Internal Development 247
Exhibit 11-1. Deciding When Replacing a Key Job Incumbent Is Unnecessary:
A Flowchart 259
Exhibit 11-2. A Worksheet for Identifying Alternatives to the Traditional
Approach to Succession Planning and Management 267
Exhibit 11-3. A Tool for Contemplating Ten Ways to Tap the Retiree Base 269
Exhibit 12-1. Continua of Online and High-Tech Approaches 272
Exhibit 12-2. A Starting Point for a Rating Sheet to Assess Vendors for
Succession Planning and Management Software 273

xvi
L IST OF E XHIBITS
Exhibit 12-3. A Hierarchy of Online and High-Tech Applications for
Succession Planning and Management 277
Exhibit 12-4. A Worksheet for Brainstorming When and How to Use Online
and High-Tech Methods 280
Exhibit 13-1. The Hierarchy of Succession Planning and Management
Evaluation 294
Exhibit 13-2. Guidelines for Evaluating the Succession Planning and
Management Program 296
Exhibit 13-3. A Worksheet for Identifying Appropriate Ways to Evaluate
Succession Planning and Management in an Organization 298
Exhibit 13-4. A Sample ‘‘Incident Report’’ for Succession Planning and
Management 299
Exhibit 13-5. Steps for Completing a Program Evaluation of a Succession
Planning and Management Program 301
Exhibit 13-6. A Checksheet for Conducting a Program Evaluation for the
Succession Planning and Management Program 303
Exhibit 14-1. A Worksheet to Structure Your Thinking About Predictions for
Succession Planning and Management in the Future 309
Exhibit 14-2. A Worksheet to Structure Your Thinking About Alternative
Approaches to Meeting Succession Needs 314
Exhibit 14-3. Age Distribution of the U.S. Population in 2025 317
Exhibit 14-4. Age Distribution of the Chinese Population in 2025 318
Exhibit 14-5. Age Distribution of the Population in the United Kingdom
in 2025 318
Exhibit 14-6. Age Distribution of the French Population in 2025 319
Exhibit 14-7. Important Characteristics of Career Planning and Management
Programs 323
Exhibit 14-8. An Assessment Sheet for Integrating Career Planning and
Management Programs with Succession Planning and
Management Programs 325

PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION
A colleague told me over the phone the other day that ‘‘there have been no
new developments in succession planning for decades.’’ My response was,
‘‘Au contraire. There have been many changes. Perhaps you are simply not
conversant with how the playing field has changed.’’ I pointed out to him that,
since the second edition of this book was published, there have been many
changes in the world and in succession planning. Allow me a moment to list a
few:
Changes in the World
▲ The Aftereffects of 9/11. When the World Trade Center was destroyed,
172 corporate vice presidents lost their lives. That tragic event reinforced the
message, earlier foreshadowed by the tragic loss of life in Oklahoma City, that
life is fragile and talent at all levels is increasingly at risk in a world where
disaster can strike unexpectedly. In a move that would have been unthinkable
ten years ago, some organizations are examining their bench strength in locations
other than their headquarters in New York City, Washington, or other
cities that might be prone to attack if terrorists should wipe out a whole city
through use of a dirty nuclear weapon or other chemical or biological agent.
Could the organization pick up the pieces and continue functioning without
headquarters? That awful, but necessary, question is on the minds of some
corporate and government leaders today. (In fact, one client of mine has set a
goal of making a European capital the alternative corporate headquarters, with
a view toward having headquarters completely re-established in Europe within
24 hours of the total loss of the New York City headquarters, if disaster should
strike.)
▲ The Aftereffects of Many Corporate Scandals. Ethics, morality, and values
have never been more prominent than they are today. In the wake of
the scandals affecting Enron, Global Crossing, WorldCom, and many other
corporations—and the incredible departure of Arthur Andersen from the corporate
world—many leaders have recognized that ethics, morality, and values
do matter. Corporate boards have gotten more involved in succession planxvii

xviii
P REFACE TO THE THIRD E DITION
ning and management owing, in part, to the requirements of the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act. And corporate leaders, thinking about succession, realize that future
leaders must model the behaviors they want others to exhibit and must avoid
practices that give even the mere appearance of impropriety.
▲ Growing Recognition of the Aging Workforce. Everyone is now talking
about the demographic changes sweeping the working world in the United
States and in the other nations of the G-8. Some organizations have already
felt the effects of talent loss resulting from retirements of experienced workers.
▲ Growing Awareness that Succession Issues Amount to More Than Finding
Replacements. When experienced people leave organizations, they take
with them not only the capacity to do the work but also the accumulated
wisdom they have acquired. That happens at all levels and in all functional
areas. Succession involves more than merely planning for replacements at the
top. It also involves thinking through what to do when the most experienced
people at all levels depart—and take valuable institutional memory with them.
Changes in Succession Planning
▲ The Emergence of ‘‘Talent Management’’ and ‘‘Talent Development.’’
As is true in so many areas of management, these terms may well be in search
of meanings. They have more than one meaning. But, in many cases, talent
management refers to the efforts taken to attract, develop, and retain best-inclass
employees—dubbed high performers (or HiPers) and high potentials (or
HiPos) by some. Talent development may refer to efforts to groom HiPers or
HiPos for the future. Think of it as selective attention paid to the top performing
10 percent of employees—that’s one way it is thought of.
▲ The Emergence of ‘‘Workforce Planning.’’ While some people think that
succession planning is limited to the top of the organization chart—which I
do not believe, by the way—others regard comprehensive planning for the
future staffing needs of the organization as workforce planning. It is also a
popular term for succession planning in government, rivaling the term human
capital management in that venue.
▲ Growing Awareness of Succession Planning. More decision-makers are
becoming aware of the need for succession planning as they scurry to find
replacements for a pending tidal wave of retirements in the wake of years of
downsizing, rightsizing, and smartsizing.
▲ The Recognition that Succession Planning Is Only One of Many Solutions.
When managers hear that they are losing a valuable—and experienced—
worker, their first inclination is to clutch their hearts and say ‘‘Oh, my heavens,
I have only two ways to deal with the problem—promote from inside or hire
from outside. The work is too specialized to hire from outside, and the organization
has such weak bench strength that it is not possible to promote from
within. Therefore, we should get busy and build a succession program.’’ Of

Preface to the Third Edition
xix
course, that is much too limited a view. The goal is to get the work done and
not replace people. There are many ways to get the work done.
▲ Growing Awareness of Technical Succession Planning. While succession
planning is typically associated with preparing people to make vertical
moves on the organization chart, it is also possible to think about individuals
such as engineers, lawyers, research scientists, MIS professionals, and other
professional or technical workers who possess specialized knowledge. When
they leave the organization, they may take critically important, and proprietary,
knowledge with them. Hence, growing awareness exists for the need to do
technical succession planning, which focuses on the horizontal level of the
organization chart and involves broadening and deepening professional
knowledge and preserving it for the organization’s continued use in the future.
▲ Continuing Problems with HR Systems. HR systems are still not up to
snuff. As I consult in this field, I see too little staffing in HR departments,
poorly skilled HR workers, voodoo competency modeling efforts, insufficient
technology to support robust applications like succession, and many other
problems with the HR function itself, including timid HR people who are unwilling
to stand up to the CEO or their operating peers and exert true leadership
about what accountability systems are needed to make sure that managers
do their jobs to groom talent at the same time that they struggle to get today’s
work out the door.
Still, my professional colleague was right in the sense that the world continues
to face the crisis of leadership that was described in the preface to the
first and second editions of this book. Indeed, ‘‘a chronic crisis of governance—that
is, the pervasive incapacity of organizations to cope with the expectations
of their constituents—is now an overwhelming factor worldwide.’’ 1
That statement is as true today as it was when this book was first published in
1994. Evidence can still be found in many settings: Citizens continue to lose
faith in their elected officials to address problems at the national, regional, and
local levels; the religious continue to lose faith in high-profile church leaders
who have been stricken with sensationalized scandals; and consumers continue
to lose faith in business leaders to act responsibly and ethically. 2 Add to
those problems some others: people have lost faith that the media like newspapers
or television stations, now owned by enormous corporations, tell them
the truth—or that reporters have even bothered to check the facts; and patients
have lost faith that doctors, many of whom are now employed by large
profit-making HMOs, are really working to ‘‘do no harm.’’
A crisis of governance is also widespread inside organizations. Employees
wonder what kind of employment they can maintain when a new employment
contract has changed the relationship between workers and their organizations.
Employee loyalty is a relic of the past, 3 a victim of the downsizing craze

xx
P REFACE TO THE THIRD E DITION
so popular in the 1990s and that persists in some organizations to the present
day. Changing demographics makes the identification of successors key to the
future of many organizations when the legacy of the cutbacks in the middlemanagement
ranks, traditional training ground for senior executive positions,
has begun to be felt. If that is hard to believe, consider that 20 percent of the
best-known companies in the United States may lose 40 percent of their senior
executives to retirement at any time. 4 Demographics tell the story: The U.S.
population is aging, and that could mean many retirements soon. (See Exhibits
P-1 and P-2.)
Amid the twofold pressures of pending retirements in senior executive
ranks and the increasing value of intellectual capital and knowledge management,
it is more necessary than ever for organizations to plan for leadership
continuity and employee advancement at all levels. But that is easier said than
done. It is not consistent with longstanding tradition, which favors quick-fix
solutions to succession planning and management (SP&M) issues. Nor is it
consistent with the continuing, current trends favoring slimmed-down
staffing, outsourcing, and the use of contingent workers, which often create a
shallow talent pool from which to choose future leaders.
In previous decades, labor in the United States was plentiful and taken for
Exhibit P-1. Age Distribution of the U.S. Population, Selected Years,
1965–2025
Population (thousands)
25,000
20,000
15,000
10,000
5,000
1965
2015
1995
0
16–19
20–24
25–29
30–34
35–39
40–44
45–49
Age
50–54
55–59
60–64
65–69
70–74
75–79
80+
Source: Stacy Poulos and Demetra S. Nightengale, ‘‘The Aging Baby Boom: Implications for Employment and Training Programs.’’
Presented at http://www.urban.org/aging/abb/agingbaby.html. This report was prepared by the U.S. Department of Labor under
Contract No. F-5532-5-00-80-30.

Preface to the Third Edition
xxi
Exhibit P-2. U.S. Population by Age, 1965–2025
100000
90000
80000
70000
16–24 yr olds
25–34 yr olds
35–44 yr olds
45–54 yr olds
55 & older
60000
50000
40000
30000
20000
10000
1965 1975
1985
1995
2005
2015
2025
Year
Source: Stacy Poulos and Demetra S. Nightengale, ‘‘The Aging Baby Boom: Implications for Employment and Training Programs.’’
Presented at http://www.urban.org/aging/abb/agingbaby.html. This report was prepared by the U.S. Department of Labor under
Contract No. F-5532-5-00-80-30.
granted. Managers had the leisure to groom employees for advancement over
long time spans and to overstaff as insurance against turnover in key positions.
That was as true for management as for nonmanagement employees. Most
jobs did not require extensive prequalification. Seniority (sometimes called
job tenure), as measured by time with an organization or in an industry, was
sufficient to ensure advancement.
Succession planning and management activities properly focused on leaders
at the peak of tall organizational hierarchies because organizations were
controlled from the top down and were thus heavily dependent on the knowledge,
skills, and attitudes of top management leaders. But times have changed.
Few organizations have the luxury to overstaff in the face of fierce competition
from low-cost labor abroad and economic restructuring efforts. That is particu-

xxii
P REFACE TO THE THIRD E DITION
larly true in high-technology companies where several months’ experience
may be the equivalent of one year’s work in a traditional organization.
At the same time, products, markets, and management activities have
grown more complex. Many jobs now require extensive prequalification, both
inside and outside organizations. A track record of demonstrated and successful
work performance, more than mere time in position, and leadership competency
have become key considerations as fewer employees compete for
diminishing advancement opportunities. As employee empowerment has
broadened the ranks of decision-makers, leadership influence can be exerted
at all hierarchical levels rather than limited to those few granted authority by
virtue of their lofty titles and management positions.
For these reasons, organizations must take proactive steps to plan for future
talent needs at all levels and implement programs designed to ensure that
the right people are available for the right jobs in the right places and at the
right times to meet organizational requirements. Much is at stake in this process:
‘‘The continuity of the organization over time requires a succession of
persons to fill key positions.’’ 5 There are important social implications as well.
As management guru Peter Drucker explained in words as true today as when
they were written 6 :
The question of tomorrow’s management is,
above all, a concern of our society. Let me put
it bluntly—we have reached a point where we
simply will not be able to tolerate as a country,
as a society, as a government, the danger
that any one of our major companies will
decline or collapse because it has not made
adequate provisions for management succession.
[emphasis added]
Research adds weight to the argument favoring SP&M. First, it has been
shown that firms in which the CEO has a specific successor in mind are more
profitable than those in which no specific successor has been identified. A
possible reason is that selecting a successor ‘‘could be viewed as a favorable
general signal about the presence and development of high-quality top management.’’
7 In other words, superior-performing CEOs make SP&M and leadership
continuity top priorities. Succession planning and management has
even been credited with driving a plant turnaround by linking the organization’s
continuous improvement philosophy to individual development. 8
But ensuring leadership continuity can be a daunting undertaking. The
rules, procedures, and techniques used in the past appear to be growing increasingly
outmoded and inappropriate. It is time to revisit, rethink, and even
reengineer SP&M. That is especially true because, in the words of one observer
of the contemporary management scene, ‘‘below many a corporation’s top

Preface to the Third Edition
xxiii
two or three positions, succession planning [for talent] is often an informal,
haphazard exercise where longevity, luck, and being in the proverbial right
place at the right time determines lines of succession.’’ 9 A haphazard approach
to SP&M bodes ill for organizations in which leadership talent is diffused—and
correspondingly important—at all hierarchical levels and yet the need exists
to scramble organizational resources quickly to take advantage of business
opportunities or deal with crises.
The Purpose of This Book
Succession planning and management and leadership development figure
prominently on the agenda of many top managers. Yet, despite senior management
interest, the task often falls to human resource management (HRM) and
workplace learning and performance (WLP) professionals to spearhead and
coordinate efforts to establish and operate planned succession programs and
avert succession crises. In that way, they fill an important, proactive role demanded
of them by top managers, and they ensure that SP&M issues are not
lost in the shuffle of fighting daily fires.
But SP&M is rarely, if ever, treated in most undergraduate or graduate
college degree programs—even in those specifically tailored to preparing HRM
and WLP professionals. For this reason, HRM and WLP professionals often
need assistance when they coordinate, establish, operate, or evaluate SP&M
programs. This book is intended to provide that help. It offers practical,
how-to-do-it advice on SP&M. The book’s scope is deliberately broad. It encompasses
more than management succession planning, which is the most
frequently discussed topic by writers and consultants in the field. Stated succinctly,
the purpose of this book is to reassess SP&M and offer a current, fresh
but practical approach to ensuring leadership continuity in key positions and
building leadership talent from within.
Succession planning and management should support strategic planning
and strategic thinking and should provide an essential starting point for management
and employee development programs. Without it, organizations will
have difficulty maintaining leadership continuity—or identifying appropriate
leaders when a change in business strategy is necessary. While many large
blue-chip corporations operate best-practice SP&M programs, small and medium-sized
businesses also need them. In fact, inadequate succession plans
are a common cause of small business failure as founding entrepreneurs fade
from the scene, leaving no one to continue their legacy, 10 and as tax laws exert
an impact on the legacy of those founders as they pass away. Additionally,
nonprofit enterprises and government agencies need to give thought to planning
for future talent.
Whatever an organization’s size or your job responsibilities, then, this
book should provide useful information on establishing, managing, operating,
and evaluating SP&M programs.

xxiv
P REFACE TO THE THIRD E DITION
Sources of Information
As I began writing this book I decided to explore state-of-the-art succession
planning and management practices. I consulted several major sources of information:
1. A Tailor-Made Survey. In 2004 I surveyed over 500 HRM professionals
about SP&M practices in their organizations. Selected survey results,
which were compiled in June 2004, are published in this book for the
first time. This survey was an update of earlier surveys conducted for
the first edition (1994) and second edition (2000) of this book. While
the response rate to this survey was disappointing, the results do provide
interesting information.
2. Phone Surveys and Informal Benchmarking. I spoke by phone and in
person with vendors of specialized succession planning software and
discussed SP&M with workplace learning and performance professionals
in major corporations.
3. Other Surveys. I researched other surveys that have been conducted on
SP&M in recent years and, giving proper credit when due, I summarize
key findings of those surveys at appropriate points in the book.
4. Web Searches. I examined what resources could be found on the World
Wide Web relating to important topics in this book.
5. A Literature Search. I conducted an exhaustive literature review on
SP&M—with special emphasis on what has been written on the subject
since the last edition of this book. I also looked for case-study descriptions
of what real organizations have been doing.
6. Firsthand In-House Work Experience. Before entering the academic
world, I was responsible for a comprehensive management development
(MD) program in a major corporation. As part of that role I coordinated
management SP&M. My experiences are reflected in this book.
7. Extensive External Consulting and Public Speaking. Since entering academe,
I have also done extensive consulting and public speaking on the
topic of SP&M. I spoke about succession planning to sixty-four CEOs of
the largest corporations in Singapore; conducted training on succession
in Asia and in Europe; keynoted several conferences on succession
and spoke on the topic at many conferences; and provided guidance
for a major research study of best practices on the topic in large corporations.
Most recently, I have focused attention on best practices in government
succession at all levels—local, state, federal, and international.
The aim of these sources is to ensure that this book will provide a comprehensive
and up-to-date treatment of typical and best-in-class SP&M practices
in organizations of various sizes and types operating in different industries.

Preface to the Third Edition
xxv
The Scheme of This Book
Effective Succession Planning: Ensuring Leadership Continuity and Building
Talent from Within, Third Edition, is written for those wishing to establish,
revitalize, or review an SP&M program within their organizations. It is geared
to meet the needs of HRM and WLP executives, managers, and professionals.
It also contains useful information for chief executive officers, chief operating
officers, general managers, university faculty members who do consulting,
management development specialists who are looking for a detailed treatment
of the subject as a foundation for their own efforts, SP&M program coordinators,
and others bearing major responsibilities for developing management,
professional, technical, sales, or other employees.
The book is organized in four parts. (See Exhibit P-3.) Part I sets the stage.
Chapter 1 opens with dramatic vignettes illustrating typical—and a few rivet-
Exhibit P-3. The Organization of the Book
Part I
Background Information About
Succession Planning and Management
Part IV
Closing the “Developmental Gap”:
Operating and Evaluating a Succession
Planning and Management Program
Part II
Laying the Foundation for a
Succession Planning and
Management Program
Part III
Assessing the Present and the Future

xxvi
P REFACE TO THE THIRD E DITION
ingly atypical—problems in SP&M. The chapter also defines succession planning
and management. It also distinguishes it from replacement planning,
workforce planning, talent management, and human capital management.
Then the chapter goes on to emphasize its importance, explain why organizations
sponsor such programs, and describe different approaches to succession
planning and management.
Chapter 2 describes key trends influencing succession planning and management.
Those trends are: (1) the need for speed; (2) a seller’s market for
skills; (3) reduced loyalty among employers and workers; (4) the importance
of intellectual capital and knowledge management; (5) the key importance of
values and competencies; (6) more software available to support succession;
(7) the growing activism of boards of directors; (8) growing awareness of similarities
and differences in succession issues globally; (9) growing awareness of
similarities and differences of succession programs in special venues: government,
nonprofit, education, small business, and family business; and (10)
managing a special issue: CEO succession. The chapter clarifies what these
trends mean for SP&M efforts.
Chapter 3 summarizes the characteristics of effective SP&M programs, describes
the life cycle of SP&M programs, identifies and solves common problems
with various approaches to SP&M, describes the requirements and key
steps in a fifth-generation approach to SP&M, and explains how new approaches
to organizational change may be adapted for use with SP&M.
Chapter 4 defines competencies, explains how they are used in SP&M,
summarizes how to conduct competency studies for SP&M and use the results,
explains how organizational leaders can ‘‘build’’ competencies using development
strategies, defines values, and explains how values and values clarification
can guide SP&M efforts.
Part II consists of Chapters 5 through 7. It lays the foundation for an effective
SP&M program. Chapter 5 describes how to make the case for change,
often a necessary first step before any change effort can be successful. The
chapter reviews such important steps in this process as assessing current
SP&M practices, demonstrating business need, determining program requirements,
linking SP&M to strategic planning and human resource planning,
benchmarking SP&M practices in other organizations, and securing management
commitment. It also emphasizes the critical importance of the CEO’s
role in SP&M in businesses.
Building on the previous chapter, Chapter 6 explains how to clarify roles
in an SP&M program; formulate the program’s mission, policy, and procedure
statements; identify target groups; and set program priorities. It also addresses
the legal framework in SP&M and provides advice about strategies for rolling
out an SP&M program.
Chapter 7 rounds out Part II. It offers advice on preparing a program action
plan, communicating the action plan, conducting SP&M meetings, designing
and delivering training to support SP&M, and counseling managers about
SP&M problems uniquely affecting them and their areas of responsibility.

Preface to the Third Edition
xxvii
Part III comprises Chapters 8 and 9. It focuses on assessing present work
requirements in key positions, present individual performance, future work
requirements, and future individual potential. Crucial to an effective SP&M
program, these activities are the basis for subsequent individual development
planning.
Chapter 8 examines the present situation. It addresses the following questions:
▲ How are key positions identified?
▲ What three approaches can be used to determining work requirements
in key positions?
▲ How can full-circle, multirater assessment be used in SP&M?
▲ How is performance appraised?
▲ What techniques and approaches can be used in creating talent pools?
Chapter 9 examines the future. Related to Chapter 8, it focuses on these
questions:
▲ What key positions are likely to emerge in the future?
▲ What will be the work requirements in those positions?
▲ What is individual potential assessment, and how can it be carried out?
Part IV consists of Chapters 10 through 14. Chapters in this part focus on
closing the developmental gap by operating and evaluating an SP&M program.
Chapter 10 offers advice for testing the organization’s overall bench strength,
explains why an internal promotion policy is important, defines the term individual
development plan (IDP), describes how to prepare and use an IDP
to guide individual development, and reviews important methods to support
internal development.
Chapter 11 moves beyond the traditional approach to SP&M. It offers alternatives
to internal development as the means by which to meet replacement
needs. The basic idea of the chapter is that underlying a replacement need is
a work need that must be satisfied. There are, of course, other ways to meet
work needs than by replacing a key position incumbent. The chapter provides
a decision model to distinguish between situations when replacing a key position
incumbent is—and is not—warranted.
Chapter 12 examines how to apply online and high-tech approaches to
SP&M programs. The chapter addresses four major questions: (1) How are
online and high-tech methods defined? (2) In what areas of SP&M can online
and high-tech methods be applied? (3) How are online and high-tech applications
used? and (4) What specialized competencies are required by succession
planning coordinators to use these applications?
Chapter 13 is about evaluation, and it examines possible answers to three

xxviii
P REFACE TO THE THIRD E DITION
simple questions: (1) What is evaluation? (2) What should be evaluated in
SP&M? and (3) How should an SP&M program be evaluated?
Chapter 14 concludes the book. It offers eight predictions about SP&M.
More specifically, I end the book by predicting that SP&M will: (1) prompt
efforts by decision-makers to find flexible strategies to address future organizational
talent needs; (2) lead to integrated retention policies and procedures
that are intended to identify high-potential talent earlier, retain that talent,
and preserve older high-potential workers; (3) have a global impact; (4) be
influenced increasingly by real-time technological innovations; (5) become an
issue in government agencies, academic institutions, and nonprofit enterprises
in a way never before seen; (6) lead to increasing organizational openness
about possible successors; (7) increasingly be integrated with career development
issues; and (8) be heavily influenced in the future by concerns about
work/family balance and spirituality.
The book ends with two appendices. Appendix I addresses frequently
asked questions (FAQs) about succession planning and management. Appendix
II provides a range of case studies about succession planning and management
that describe how it is applied in various settings.
One last thing. You may be asking yourself: ‘‘How is the third edition of
this classic book different from the second edition?’’ While I did not add or
drop chapters, I did make many changes to this book. Allow me to list just a
few:
▲ The book opens with an Advance Organizer, a new feature that allows
you to assess the need for an effective SP&M program in your organization
and to go immediately to chapters that address special needs.
▲ The survey research cited in this book is new, conducted in year 2004.
▲ The literature cited in the book has been expanded and updated.
▲ New sections in one chapter have been added on specialized topics
within succession, including: (1) CEO succession; (2) succession in government;
(3) succession in small business; (4) succession in family business;
and (5) succession in international settings.
▲ A new section has been added on using assessment centers and work
portfolios in potential assessment.
▲ A new section has been added on the use of psychological assessments
in succession, a topic of growing interest.
▲ The section on competency identification, modeling, and assessment
has been updated.
▲ A new section has been added on planning developmental strategies.
▲ A new section has been added on the CEO’s role in succession.
▲ The book closes with a selection of frequently asked questions (FAQs)
about succession planning and management, which is new.

Preface to the Third Edition
xxix
▲ A CD-ROM has been added to the book—a major addition in its own
right—and it contains reproducible copies of all assessment instruments
and worksheets that appear in the book as well as three separate
briefings/workshops: one on mentoring, one as an executive briefing on
succession, and one on the manager’s role in succession. (The table of
contents for the CD is found at the back of this book.)
All these changes reflect the many changes that have occurred in the succession
planning and management field within the last few years and since the
last edition was published.
William J. Rothwell
University Park, Pennsylvania
January 2005

This page intentionally left blank

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Writing a book resembles taking a long journey. The researching, drafting, and
repeated revising requires more time, effort, patience, and self-discipline than
most authors care to admit or have the dedication to pursue. Yet no book is
written in isolation. Completing such a journey requires any author to seek
help from many people, who provide advice—and directions—along the way.
This is my opportunity to thank those who have helped me. I would therefore
like to extend my sincere appreciation to my graduate research assistants,
Ms. Wang Wei and Ms. Yeonsoo Kim, for their excellent and able assistance in
helping me to send out and analyze the survey results, and for helping me to
track down and secure necessary copyright permissions.
I would also like to thank Adrienne Hickey and other staff members at
AMACOM, who offered numerous useful ideas on the project while demonstrating
enormous patience with me and my busy schedule in consulting and
presenting around the world.
xxxi

This page intentionally left blank

ADVANCE ORGANIZER
FOR THIS BOOK
Complete the following assessment before you read this book. Use it to help
you assess the need for an effective succession planning and management
(SP&M) program in your organization. You may also use it to refer directly to
topics in the book that are of special importance to you now.
Directions: Read each item below. Circle Y (yes), N/A (not applicable), or
N (no) in the left column next to each item. Spend about 15 minutes on this.
Think of succession planning and management in your organization as you
believe it is—not as you think it should be. When you finish, score and interpret
the results using the instructions appearing at the end of this Advance
Organizer. Then be prepared to share your responses with others in your organization
as a starting point for planning. If you would like to learn more about
one item below, refer to the number in the right column to find the chapter in
this book in which the subject is discussed.
Circle your response in the left-hand column for each response below.
Has your organization:
Chapter
Y N/A N 1. Clearly defined the need for succession 1
planning and management (SP&M)?
Y N/A N 2. Distinguished succession planning and 1
management from replacement, workforce
planning, talent management, and human
capital management?
Y N/A N 3. Made the business case by showing the im- 1
portance of succession planning and management?
Y N/A N 4. Clarified the reasons (goals) for the succes- 1
sion planning and management program?
Y N/A N 5. Investigated best practices and approaches 1
to succession planning and management?
Y N/A N 6. Considered the drivers of change and the 2
trends that may influence succession planning
and management?
1

2 E FFECTIVE S UCCESSION P LANNING
Y N/A N 7. Clarified how trends, as they unfold, may 2
influence succession planning and management
in your organization?
Y N/A N 8. Investigated the characteristics of effective 3
succession planning and management programs?
Y N/A N 9. Thought about how to roll out a succes- 3
sion planning and management program?
Y N/A N 10. Set out to identify, and try to avoid, com- 3
mon problems with succession planning
and management?
Y N/A N 11. Considered integrating whole-systems 3
transformational change into the succession
planning and management program?
Y N/A N 12. Considered integrating appreciative in- 3
quiry into the succession planning and
management program?
Y N/A N 13. Planned for what might be required to es- 3
tablish a state-of-the-art approach to the
succession planning and management program?
Y N/A N 14. Defined competencies as they might be 4
used in your organization?
Y N/A N 15. Considered how competency models 4
might be used for your succession planning
and management program?
Y N/A N 16. Explored new developments in compe- 4
tency identification, modeling, and assessment
for the succession planning and
management program?
Y N/A N 17. Identified competency development strat- 4
egies to build bench strength?
Y N/A N 18. Specifically considered how values might 4
impact the succession planning and management
program?
Y N/A N 19. Determined organizational requirements 5
for the succession planning and management
program?
Y N/A N 20. Linked succession planning and manage- 5
ment activities to organizational and
human resource strategy?
Y N/A N 21. Benchmarked best practices and common 5
business practices in succession planning
and management practices in other organizations?

Advance Organizer for This Book
3
Y N/A N 22. Obtained and built management commit- 5
ment to systematic succession planning
and management?
Y N/A N 23. Clarified the key role to be played by the 5
CEO in the succession effort?
Y N/A N 24. Conducted a risk analysis? 6
Y N/A N 25. Formulated a mission statement for the 6
succession effort?
Y N/A N 26. Written policy and procedures to guide the 6
succession effort?
Y N/A N 27. Identified target groups for the succession 6
effort?
Y N/A N 28. Set program priorities? 6
Y N/A N 29. Addressed the legal framework affecting 6
the the succession planning and management
program?
Y N/A N 30. Established strategies for rolling out the 6
program?
Y N/A N 31. Prepared a program action plan? 7
Y N/A N 32. Communicated the action plan? 7
Y N/A N 33. Conducted succession planning and man- 7
agement meetings?
Y N/A N 34. Trained on succession planning and man- 7
agement?
Y N/A N 35. Counseled managers about succession 7
planning problems in their areas?
Y N/A N 36. Identified key positions? 8
Y N/A N 37. Appraised performance and applied per- 8
formance management?
Y N/A N 38. Considered creating talent pools? 8
Y N/A N 39. Thought of possibilities beyond talent 8
pools?
Y N/A N 40. Identified key positions for the future? 9
Y N/A N 41. Assessed individual potential for promot- 9
ability on some systematic basis?
Y N/A N 42. Considered using assessment centers? 9
Y N/A N 43. Considered using work portfolios to assess 9
individual potential?
Y N/A N 44. Tested bench strength? 10
Y N/A N 45. Formulated internal promotion policy? 10
Y N/A N 46. Prepared individual development plans? 10
Y N/A N 47. Developed successors internally? 10
Y N/A N 48. Considered using leadership development 10
programs in succession planning?

4 E FFECTIVE S UCCESSION P LANNING
Y N/A N 49. Considered using executive coaching in 10
succession planning?
Y N/A N 50. Considered using mentoring in succession 10
planning?
Y N/A N 51. Considered using action learning in suc- 10
cession planning?
Y N/A N 52. Explored alternative ways to get the work 11
done beyond succession?
Y N/A N 53. Explored innovative approaches to tap- 11
ping the retiree base?
Y N/A N 54. Investigated how online and high-tech 12
methods be applied?
Y N/A N 55. Decided what should be evaluated? 13
Y N/A N 56. Decided how the program can be evalu- 13
ated?
Y N/A N 57. Considered how changing conditions may 14
affect the succession planning and management
program?
Scoring and Interpreting the Advance Organizer
Give your organization one point for each Y and zero for each N or N/A. Total
the number of Ts, and place the sum in the line next to the word TOTAL.
Then interpret your score as follows:
50 or more Your organization is apparently using effective succession planning
and management practices.
40 to 49 Improvements could be made to succession planning and management
practices. On the whole, however, the organization is
proceeding on the right track.
30 to 39 Succession planning and management practices in your organization
do not appear to be as effective as they should be. Significant
improvements should be made.
28 or less Succession planning and management practices are ineffective
in your organization. They are probably a source of costly mistakes,
productivity losses, and unnecessary employee turnover.
Take immediate corrective action.

PART
I
BACKGROUND INFORMATION ABOUT
SUCCESSION PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
Part I
Background Information About
Succession Planning and Management
Part IV
Closing the “Developmental Gap”:
Operating and Evaluating a Succession
Planning and Management Program
Part II
Laying the Foundation for a
Succession Planning and
Management Program
Part III
Assessing the Present and the Future
•Defines SP&M.
•Distinguishes SP&M from replacement planning.
•Describes the importance of SP&M.
•Lists reasons for an SP&M program.
•Reviews approaches to SP&M.
•Reviews key trends influencing SP&M and explains their implications.
•Lists key characteristics of effective SP&M programs.
•Describes the life cycle of SP&M programs.
•Explains how to identify and solve problems with various approaches to SP&M.
•Lists the requirements and key steps for a fifth-generation approach to SP&M.
•Defines competencies and explains how they are used in SP&M.
•Describes how to conduct and use competency identification studies for SP&M.

This page intentionally left blank

C H A P T E R 1
WHAT IS SUCCESSION PLANNING
AND MANAGEMENT?
Six Ministudies: Can You Solve These Succession Problems?
How is your organization handling succession planning and management
(SP&M)? Read the following vignettes and, on a separate sheet, describe how
your organization would solve the problem presented in each. If you can offer
an effective solution to all the problems in the vignettes, then your organization
may already have an effective SP&M program in place; if not, your organization
may have an urgent need to devote more attention to the problem of
succession.
Vignette 1
An airplane crashes in the desert, killing all on board. Among the passengers
are top managers of Acme Engineering, a successful consulting firm. When the
vice president of human resources at Acme is summoned to the phone to
receive the news, she gasps, turns pale, looks blankly at her secretary, and
breathlessly voices the first question that enters her mind: ‘‘Now who’s in
charge?’’
Vignette 2
On the way to a business meeting in Bogota, Colombia, the CEO of Normal
Fixtures (maker of ceramic bathroom fixtures) is seized and is being held for
ransom by freedom fighters. They demand 1 million U.S. dollars in exchange
for his life, or they will kill him within 72 hours. Members of the corporate
board are beside themselves with concern.
Vignette 3
Georgina Myers, supervisor of a key assembly line, has just called in sick after
two years of perfect attendance. She personally handles all purchasing and
7

8 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
production scheduling in the small plant, as well as overseeing the assembly
line. The production manager, Mary Rawlings, does not know how the plant
will function in the absence of this key employee, who carries in her head
essential, and proprietary, knowledge of production operations. She is sure
that production will be lost today because Georgina has no trained backup.
Vignette 4
Marietta Diaz was not promoted to supervisor. She is convinced that she is a
victim of racial and sexual discrimination. Her manager, Wilson Smith, assures
her that that is not the case. As he explains to her, ‘‘You just don’t have the
skills and experience to do the work. Gordon Hague, who was promoted,
already possesses those skills. The decision was based strictly on individual
merit and supervisory job requirements.’’ But Marietta remains troubled. How,
she wonders, could Gordon have acquired those skills in his previous nonsupervisory
job?
Vignette 5
Morton Wile is about to retire as CEO of Multiplex Systems. For several years
he has been grooming L. Carson Adams as his successor. Adams has held the
posts of executive vice president and chief operating officer, and his performance
has been exemplary in those positions. Wile has long been convinced
that Adams will make an excellent CEO. But, as his retirement date approaches,
Wile has recently been hearing questions about his choice. Several
division vice presidents and members of the board of directors have asked him
privately how wise it is to allow Adams to take over, since (it is whispered) he
has long had a high-profile extramarital affair with his secretary and is rumored
to be an alcoholic. How, they wonder, can he be chosen to assume the top
leadership position when he carries such personal baggage? Wile is loathe to
talk to Adams about these matters because he does not want to police anyone’s
personal life. But he is sufficiently troubled to think about initiating an executive
search for a CEO candidate from outside the company.
Vignette 6
Linda Childress is general manager of a large consumer products plant in the
Midwest. She has helped her plant weather many storms. The first was a corporate-sponsored
voluntary early retirement program, which began eight years
ago. In that program Linda lost her most experienced workers, and among its
effects in the plant were costly work redistribution, retraining, retooling, and

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
9
automation. The second storm was a forced layoff that occurred five years ago.
It was driven by fierce foreign competition in consumer products manufacture.
The layoff cost Linda fully one-fourth of her most recently hired workers
and many middle managers, professionals, and technical employees. It also
led to a net loss of protected labor groups in the plant’s workforce to a level
well below what had taken the company ten years of ambitious efforts to
achieve. Other consequences were increasingly aggressive union action in the
plant; isolated incidents of violence against management personnel by disgruntled
workers; growing evidence of theft, pilferage, and employee sabotage;
and skyrocketing absenteeism and turnover rates.
The third storm swept the plant on the heels of the layoff. Just three years
ago corporate headquarters announced a company-wide Business Process Reengineering
program. Its aims were to improve product quality and customer
service, build worker involvement and empowerment, reduce scrap rates, and
meet competition from abroad. While the goals were laudable, the program
was greeted with skepticism because it was introduced so soon after the layoff.
Many employees—and supervisors—voiced the opinion that ‘‘corporate headquarters
is using Business Process Reengineering to clean up the mess they
created by chopping heads first and asking questions about work reallocation
later.’’ However, since job security is an issue of paramount importance to
everyone at the plant, the external consultant sent by corporate headquarters
to introduce Business Process Reengineering received grudging cooperation.
But the Business Process Reengineering initiative has created side effects of its
own. One is that executives, middle managers, and supervisors are uncertain
about their roles and the results expected of them. Another is that employees,
pressured to do better work with fewer resources, are complaining bitterly
about compensation or other reward practices that they feel do not reflect
their increased responsibilities, efforts, or productivity. And a fourth storm
is brewing. Corporate executives, it is rumored, are considering moving all
production facilities offshore to take advantage of reduced labor and employee
health-care insurance costs. Many employees are worried that this is really not
a rumor but is, instead, a fact.
Against this backdrop, Linda has noticed that it is becoming more difficult
to find backups for hourly workers and ensure leadership continuity in the
plant’s middle and top management ranks. Although the company has long
conducted an annual ‘‘succession planning and management’’ ritual in which
standardized forms, supplied by corporate headquarters, are sent out to managers
by the plant’s human resources department, Linda cannot remember
when the forms were actually used during a talent search. The major reason,
Linda believes, is that managers and employees have rarely followed through
on the Individual Development Plans (IDPs) established to prepare people for
advancement opportunities.

10 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Defining Succession Planning and Management
As the vignettes above illustrate, organizations need to plan for talent to assume
key leadership positions or backup positions on a temporary or permanent
basis. Real-world cases have figured prominently in the business press in
recent years. (See Exhibits 1-1 and 1-2.)
Among the first writers to recognize that universal organizational need was
Henri Fayol (1841–1925). Fayol’s classic fourteen points of management, first
enunciated early in the twentieth century and still widely regarded today, indicate
that management has a responsibility to ensure the ‘‘stability of tenure of
personnel.’’ 1 If that need is ignored, Fayol believed, key positions would end
up being filled by ill-prepared people.
Succession planning and management (SP&M) is the process that helps
ensure the stability of the tenure of personnel. It is perhaps best understood
as any effort designed to ensure the continued effective performance of an
organization, division, department, or work group by making provision for the
development, replacement, and strategic application of key people over time.
Succession planning has been defined as:
a means of identifying critical management
positions, starting at the levels of project manager
and supervisor and extending up to the
highest position in the organization. Succession
planning also describes management
positions to provide maximum flexibility in
lateral management moves and to ensure that
as individuals achieve greater seniority, their
management skills will broaden and become
more generalized in relation to total organizational
objectives rather than to purely departmental
objectives. 2
Succession planning should not stand alone. It should be paired with succession
management, which assumes a more dynamic business environment.
It recognizes the ramifications of the new employment contract, whereby corporations
no longer (implicitly) assure anyone continued employment, even
if he or she is doing a good job. 3
An SP&M program is thus a deliberate and systematic effort by an organization
to ensure leadership continuity in key positions, retain and develop intellectual
and knowledge capital for the future, and encourage individual
advancement. Systematic ‘‘succession planning occurs when an organization
adapts specific procedures to insure the identification, development, and longterm
retention of talented individuals.’’ 4
Succession planning and management need not be limited solely to man-

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
11
Exhibit 1-1. How General Electric Planned the Succession
Good news, bad news.
The idea that the hard-nosed CEO of a major corporation would lose sleep over
giving bad news to two executives takes a bit of swallowing.
It happens to be true. The CEO in question was Jack Welch, boss of General Electric
(GE). The bad news he had to impart was that James McNerney, head of GE’s
aircraft-engine business, and Robert Nardelli, chief of the business making turbines
and generators for electric utilities, would not be succeeding Welch as CEO.
Welch had delivered bad news any number of times before, but the circumstances
here were different. He said: ‘‘I’ve fired people my whole career—for performance.
Here I’ve got three guys who’ve been great.’’
The third guy was Jeffrey R. Immelt, head of GE’s medical-system’s business and the
ultimate winner. Later this year he will become chief executive of the world’s most
valuable company.
The process of choosing Welch’s successor, throughout shrouded in the utmost
secrecy, had taken six years, five months and two days. The story that has now
emerged is curious in many ways. Most significantly, Welch and the board broke
what are considered to be the rules in corporate-succession planning.
No Room for Outsiders
Traditionally, approaches might include naming a chief operating officer or other
heir apparent. An outsider might be considered or some common template used for
measuring candidates.
These possibilities were eschewed and the time factor was remarkable, too. Bestpractice
guidelines for boards suggest use of fewer than 100 director-hours to go
through the succession processes. GE’s board spent thousands of hours over several
years.
Two factors make GE’s approach worthy of further examination. First, many major
U.S. companies have recently failed in their choice of a new CEO, which suggests
something is wrong with the way that the boss is picked. Second, Welch has, in his
20 years at the top, proved himself to be a CEO with a very sure touch.
The succession process began formally in June 1994, when Welch was 59. During
a board management development and compensation committee (MDCC) meeting,
24 candidates were discussed in three groups. ‘‘Obvious field’’ covered the
seven men running GE’s largest businesses. ‘‘Contenders’’ were four executives just
below the top tier, and 13 others admired by Jack Welch were included under
‘‘broader consensus field.’’ This was the list that produced the three ‘‘finalists.’’
(continues)

12 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 1-1. (continued)
Welch has said that the process was about ‘‘chemistry, blood, sweat, family, feelings’’
not simply mechanics, and what happened from 1994 onwards backs that
up.
Getting to Know Candidates
Every candidate was tested for his ability to grow and Welch also wanted directors
to get to know the leading candidates. Directors and candidates mixed socially, for
example at the Augusta National Golf Club before the U.S. Masters tournament,
and played golf together at GE’s headquarters in Fairfield, Connecticut. Welch also
encouraged candidates to call directors directly, bypassing him, when they thought
it would be useful.
More formally, regular board events provided the opportunity for hundreds of director-hours
each year devoted to discussing potential successors.
A couple of years after the process began, Welch and the MDCC decided that
committee members needed to know more about leading candidates. The committee
spent a year or so visiting several GE businesses. It was a highly unusual practice
in the corporate world and one smokescreen involved taking in more visits than
were necessary for the succession process.
By December 1997, the field was down to eight. Gradually several men effectively
dropped out of the running. When head of lighting, David Calhoun, left to run the
Employers Reinsurance business within GE Capital, he was correctly viewed as an
ex-candidate. Finally, it was down to three: McNerney, Nardelli and Immelt.
Welch continued to buck convention. At this point he might have brought the top
contenders to jobs at GE headquarters where he and the board could have had
them under intense scrutiny. But what he wanted to avoid was the ‘‘political and
poisonous’’ atmosphere created 20 years earlier when he had been a contender at
HQ himself. Then, as he jockeyed for pole position, he had at lunch to ‘‘sit across
from the guys you were competing with.’’
McNerney, Nardelli and Immelt continued therefore, hundreds of miles apart, to
run their own businesses.
If everyone at GE is to be believed, six years of discussion took place before a name
was put forward as the proposed winner. Director Frank Rhodes, Professor Emeritus
at Cornell University, was the first to break ranks. He opted for Immelt; other directors
agreed and, though the announcement was four months away, it was clear
which way the wind was blowing.
Skeptics Confounded
In late October, GE announced its biggest ever acquisition—Honeywell for $45
billion in stock. This delayed announcement of the succession but the skeptical view

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
13
that Welch was reluctant to give up power proved unfounded: Immelt will take over
in December, eight months later than originally scheduled.
Welch flew to Cincinnati and Albany to give McNerney and Nardelli respectively the
bad news. Both men are now CEOs elsewhere. Welch says he will never reveal the
reasons that Immelt emerged triumphant, but his youth—he is 44—his popularity
and the perception that he has the greatest capacity to grow must all have been
factors. Frank Rhodes said that he demonstrated ‘‘the most expansive thinking.’’
If he is to survive and flourish like his predecessor, Immelt will need to continue to
develop that quality.
The General Electric approach to finding Jack Welch’s successor as CEO was thorough
to the point of overkill. On the other hand, we are talking about the world’s
most valuable company. Welch was absolutely determined to succeed, where many
major companies have failed recently, in finding the right man for the job. It will be
fascinating to see whether Jeffrey Immelt fits the bill.
Note: This was a precis of an article by Geoffrey Colvin, entitled ‘‘Changing of the Guard,’’ which was published in Fortune,
January 8, 2001.
Source: ‘‘How General Electric Planned the Succession,’’ Human Resource Management International Digest 9:4 (2001), 6–8.
Used with permission of Human Resource Management International Digest.
agement positions or management employees. Indeed, an effective succession
planning and management effort should also address the needs for critical
backups and individual development in any job category—including key people
in the professional, technical, sales, clerical, and production ranks. The
need to extend the definition of SP&M beyond the management ranks is becoming
more important as organizations take active steps to build highperformance
and high-involvement work environments in which decision
making is decentralized, leadership is diffused throughout an empowered
workforce, and proprietary technical knowledge accumulated from many years
of experience in one corporate culture is key to doing business.
One aim of SP&M is to match the organization’s available (present) talent
to its needed (future) talent. Another is to help the organization meet the
strategic and operational challenges facing it by having the right people at the
right places at the right times to do the right things. In these senses, SP&M
should be regarded as a fundamental tool for organizational learning because
SP&M should ensure that the lessons of organizational experience—what is
sometimes called institutional memory—will be preserved and combined
with reflection on that experience to achieve continuous improvement in work
results (what is sometimes called double loop learning). 5 Stated in another
way, SP&M is a way to ensure the continued cultivation of leadership and
intellectual talent, and to manage the critically important knowledge assets of
organizations.
(text continues on page 16)

14 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 1-2. The Big Mac Succession
Jim Cantalupo’s sudden death brought out the best in McDonald’s board. At his
first annual meeting as chief executive, Jim Cantalupo faced an angry shareholder
displaying photos of a filthy McDonald’s toilet and demanding action. ‘‘We are
going to take care of it,’’ he pledged. And he did. His strategy of ending the rapid
expansion of the world’s biggest fast-food company and refocusing it on providing
better meals in cleaner restaurants with improved service was starting to produce
encouraging results. Then, on April 19th, he suddenly died. The death of a leader
at such a critical time can ruin a company. But, thanks not least to Mr. Cantalupo,
it will probably not ruin McDonald’s.
Mr. Cantalupo was a McDonald’s veteran. He joined the company in 1974, as an
accountant in its headquarters near Chicago. As head of international operations,
he presided over much of the globalization of the Big Mac: McDonald’s now has
more than 30,000 restaurants in 119 countries. Although promoted to president,
he was passed over for the top job when Jack Greenberg was appointed chief
executive in 1998.
Then McDonald’s began to stumble badly. Service levels came in for increasing
criticism, sales began to fall and the company suffered its first quarterly loss. It also
became embroiled in the debate about obesity and the role of fast food. McDonald’s
was even sued by some parents for making their children fat. (Although this
failed, a future lawsuit may yet succeed.) Mr. Greenberg put a recovery plan into
action and vowed to stay on to execute it, only to be forced out by worried investors.
The board turned to Mr. Cantalupo, who came out of retirement to take over as
chairman and chief executive in January 2003.
Mr. Cantalupo, who was 60, died of a suspected heart attack at a huge convention
in Orlando, Florida, for more than 12,000 employees, suppliers, owners, and operators
of McDonald’s restaurants worldwide. It was the sort of big meet-the-troops
event that the affable Mr. Cantalupo enjoyed.
Those members of the board already in Florida quickly assembled and others joined
by phone. Within six hours, Charlie Bell, a 43-year-old Australian who had been
appointed chief operating officer by Mr. Cantalupo and had been working closely
with him, was made chief executive. Andrew McKenna, 74, the board’s presiding
director and also the boss of Schwarz, which supplies McDonald’s with lots of packaging
materials, was appointed non-executive chairman.
The speech that Mr. Cantalupo was due to give to welcome the delegates was later
given by Mr. Bell, who joined the McDonald’s empire when, aged 15, he got a parttime
job in an outlet in a suburb of Sydney. So he knows how to flip a burger. The
delegates were clearly saddened, but they gave Mr. Bell, the first non-American to
lead the company, a resounding reception. Mr. Cantalupo would have approved.

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
15
So did Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, head of the Chief Executive Leadership Institute at Yale
University. ‘‘It was a board operating at its finest,’’ says Mr. Sonnenfeld, author of
‘‘The Hero’s Farewell,’’ a book about the contentious job of selecting a new boss.
Concerning Mr. Cantalupo, the McDonald’s board has twice acted impressively, he
says. First, it acted decisively in reversing course and turning to Mr. Cantalupo when
things went wrong. Second, it acted swiftly to execute a succession plan that Mr.
Cantalupo himself had put into place, even though he was expected to remain in
the job for several more years. Mr. Bell had been widely acknowledged as Mr.
Cantalupo’s heir apparent.
Succession planning can be fraught with difficulty, and is all too often neglected.
Vodafone had no succession strategy in place when, in December 2002, Sir Christopher
Gent, its chief executive, said he would leave. A search for a replacement led to
Arun Sarin, a non-executive director, being given the job. Now Vodafone operates a
succession-planning process in every country where it has a business. But more
formal procedures, though on balance superior, can cause difficulties, especially if
an officially anointed heir starts to get restless (i.e., Prince Charles syndrome). And
it takes a trusting, well-disciplined board to stick to a succession plan, as the General
Electric board did when Jack Welch groomed three potential contenders for his
job.
A sudden death can be the toughest kind of succession to deal with. Some bosses
are said to leave a sealed envelope holding the name of a preferred successor in
the event of a fatality. Yet the succession at McDonald’s, forced on it by tragic
circumstances, contrasts sharply with that now under way at Coca-Cola. Ever since
Roberto Goizueta, Coke’s pioneering boss, died of lung cancer in 1997, the firm
has been beset by troubles. Douglas Ivester was appointed quickly to replace Mr.
Goizueta, but two years later was forced to step down. In February, his successor,
Douglas Daft, suddenly announced that he would retire by the end of this year.
Coke is said to want James Kilts, the boss of Gillette, for the top job—but he may
not want it. Publicly looking outside its ranks for a leader is interpreted by some
analysts as evidence of management weakness within.
McDonald’s could not be accused of that, although Mr. Bell still has to prove his
worth. New menus, featuring smaller portions and such healthier things as salads
and bottled water, are reviving the company’s image. But at the same time the
company cannot afford to drive away its many fans of burgers and fries. Simply
getting them to come back more often could do wonders for McDonald’s profits.
There are valuable lessons to be learned from successful markets, such as Australia
and France—both places where Mr. Bell has worked. But there remains a long way
to go, and things could yet become extremely difficult. Even planning well ahead
and having a chosen successor ready and waiting, though better than not doing so,
is no guarantee that the successor will actually be a success.
Source: ‘‘Business: The Big Mac Succession: Face Value,’’ The Economist 371:8372 (2004), 74. Used with permission of The
Economist.

16 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Distinguishing Succession Planning and Management from
Replacement Planning, Workforce Planning, Talent
Management, and Human Capital Management
Terminology can be confusing. And that fact is as true with succession planning
and management as it is with anything else. So, how can succession planning
and management be distinguished from replacement planning?
Workforce planning? Talent management? Human capital management?
Succession Planning and Management and Replacement Planning
Succession planning and management should not be confused with replacement
planning, though they are compatible and often overlap. The obvious
need for some form of replacement planning is frequently a driving force behind
efforts that eventually turn into SP&M programs—as Vignettes 1 and 2 at
the opening of this chapter dramatically illustrate. That need was only heightened
by the 1996 plane crash of U.S. Secretary of Commerce Ron Brown,
which also claimed the lives of over thirty other top executives.
In its simplest form, replacement planning is a form of risk management.
In that respect it resembles other organizational efforts to manage risk, such
as ensuring that fire sprinkling systems in computer rooms are not positioned
so as to destroy valuable computer equipment in case of fire, or segregating
accounting duties to reduce the chance of embezzlement. The chief aim of
replacement planning is to limit the chance of catastrophe stemming from the
immediate and unplanned loss of key job incumbents—as happened on a
large scale when the Twin Towers of the World Trade Center collapsed and on
an individual level when the CEO of McDonald’s was stricken by a heart attack.
However, SP&M goes beyond simple replacement planning. It is proactive
and attempts to ensure the continuity of leadership by cultivating talent from
within the organization through planned development activities. It should be
regarded as an important tool for implementing strategic plans.
Succession Planning and Management and Workforce Planning
Workforce planning connotes comprehensive planning for the organization’s
entire workforce. 6 To some people, succession planning and management
refers to top-of-the-organization-chart planning and development only. However,
in this book, succession planning and management refers more broadly
to planning for the right number and right type of people to meet the organization’s
needs over time.
Succession Planning and Management and Talent Management
‘‘Talent management is the process of recruiting, on-boarding, and developing,
as well as the strategies associated with those activities in organizations.’’ 7

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
17
Like so many HR-related terms, ‘‘the phrase talent management is used
loosely and often interchangeably across a wide array of terms such as succession
planning, human capital management, resource planning, and employee
performance management. Gather any group of HR professionals in a room
and you can be sure to have a plethora of additional terms.’’ 8 Some organizational
leaders associate talent management with efforts to devote special attention
to managing the best-in-class talent of the organization—the upper 1 to
10 percent. Not limited to top-of-the-house planning, it may refer to investing
money where the returns are likely to be greatest—that is, on high-performing
or high-potential talent at any organizational level. Hence, efforts to develop
talent that is strategically important for the organization’s future means the
strategic development of talent. 9
Succession Planning and Management and Human Capital
Management
Human capital management (HCM) theory is all about individuals and their
economic value. Unfortunately, HCM has been (too broadly) interpreted to
mean that individuals are calculating players who act out of self-interest only,
that the only value of individuals is as economic commodities (and thus the
saying that ‘‘people are our greatest assets’’), and that the social value of developing
human resources resides only in summing the total value of individual
development efforts. 10 Like talent management, HCM is also a term in search
of meaning. Indeed, ‘‘out of 49 organizations surveyed, just 11 said they attempted
to measure human capital—and many of these confessed to being
unsure what the term meant.’’ 11
But a key point about human capital management is that people are valuable
for more than the labor they can produce. Human beings are enormously
creative—a key thing that sets them apart from machines, gizmos, and gadgets—and
this ability to think creatively has economic value. Individuals, not
computers, discover new ideas that can be turned to profit. As entrepreneurs,
they found companies. They also discover new ways to serve customers, find
new customers or markets for old products, and discover ways to improve
work processes to increase productivity.
A key issue in HCM, then, is that creativity has value. So does the institutional
memory that individuals carry in their heads. While more will be written
about that later in this book, it is worth emphasizing at this point that succession
planning can mean more than just finding warm bodies to fill vacancies.
Additional issues should be considered—such as the value of institutional
memory and creativity.
ASTD has published an important white paper on HCM that is worth reviewing,
since it describes best practices in the area. 12 The U.S. General Ac-

18 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
counting Office has also done work to emphasize the importance of HCM in
U.S. government work. 13
Making the Business Case for Succession Planning and
Management
Many requirements must be satisfied if organizations are to survive in a fiercely
competitive environment. One key requirement is that replacements must be
available to assume critically important positions as they become vacant. Indeed,
‘‘succession planning, like a relay race, has to do with passing on
responsibility. . . . Drop the baton and you lose the race.’’ 14
Numerous surveys over the years have emphasized the importance of
SP&M. Chief executives consistently cite the issue as one of their major concerns.
Leadership succession has also surfaced as an issue of concern to corporate
boards 15 : A survey of corporate board member policies and practices by
Korn/Ferry International asked chairpersons to assess the importance of issues
facing their companies in the next five years. Those typically seen as trendsetters—the
billion-dollar companies—rated management succession as the third
most important issue [emphasis added], on the heels of financial results and
strategic planning. According to Lester Korn, CEO of the search firm, boards
are beginning to realize that they have ‘‘the same obligations to protect the
human resource asset base for the shareholders as they do to protect the balance
sheet of the corporation.’’
There are several reasons that both CEOs and corporate boards are so
interested in SP&M. First, top managers are aware that the continued survival
of the organization depends on having the right people in the right places at
the right times to do the right things. Strategic success is, in large measure, a
function of having the right leadership. Leaving the development of those leaders
to chance, and hoping for the best, may have worked at one time. Ignoring
the development of leaders and depending on headhunters to find replacements
for key people may also have worked at one time. But these approaches
are not working now. Some effort must be made to ensure that the organization
is systematically identifying and preparing high-potential candidates for
key positions.
Second, as continuing downsizing and other cost-containment efforts have
led to reductions in the middle management ranks—a traditional training
ground and source of top management talent—there are simply fewer people
available to advance to the top ranks from within. That means that great care
must be taken to identify promising candidates early and actively cultivate their
development. Individuals who are both high performers on their present jobs
and high potentials for future leadership positions should not be taken for
granted, especially in a seller’s labor market, where exceptionally talented
workers, like star athletes, can barter their abilities to the highest bidders.

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
19
The reason is that slimmed-down organizations have reduced their absolute
numbers. Worse yet, members of this group are differentially affected by downsizing
because, as work is redistributed after a downsizing, high performers
end up shouldering more of the burden to get the work out while (in most
cases) the rewards they receive are held constant. They are thus more likely to
become dissatisfied and leave the organization than will their less productive
peers. To avoid that problem—which can be disastrous for the leadership continuity
of the organization—top managers must take active steps to identify,
reward, and advance high performers through vertical and horizontal career
moves in a manner commensurate with their increased contributions.
Third, when SP&M is left informal and thus unplanned, job incumbents
tend to identify and groom successors who are remarkably like themselves in
appearance, background, and values. They establish a ‘‘bureaucratic kinship
system’’ that is based on ‘‘homosocial reproduction.’’ 16 As Rosabeth Moss
Kanter explained:
Because of the situation in which managers
function, because of the position of managers
in the corporate structure, social similarity
tends to become extremely important to them.
The structure sets in motion forces leading to
the replication of managers as the same kind
of social individuals. And the men who manage
reproduce themselves in kind. 17
As a consequence, white males tend to pick as successors other white males.
(It is worth noting that white males are not the only ones guilty of picking
people like themselves because people of other sexes, races, and backgrounds
will do likewise.) That practice, of course, perpetuates such problems as the
so-called glass ceiling and other subtle forms of employment discrimination.
To avoid these problems and promote diversity and multiculturalism in the
workplace, systematic efforts must be made to identify and groom the best
successors for key positions, not just those who are clones of the present key
job incumbents.
Succession planning and management is important for other reasons as
well. Indeed, it ‘‘forms the basis for (1) communicating career paths to each
individual; (2) establishing development and training plans; (3) establishing
career paths and individual job moves; (4) communicating upward and laterally
concerning the management organization; and, (5) creating a more comprehensive
human resources planning system.’’ 18
As I have toured the country—and other countries—to do public speaking
and consulting about succession, I am often asked, ‘‘How do we make the
case for succession in our organizations?’’ To answer that, I ask whether the
questioners face supportive or skeptical CEOs. If the CEO is supportive, then

20 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
the most important customer has already been convinced. But if the CEO is
skeptical, then some effort should be made to analyze the risks that the organization
may face. (This is called risk analysis.)
One way to do that is to request from the payroll department the projected
retirement dates for the organization’s entire workforce. That should also be
done for three-year rolling periods to assess what percentage of the workforce
is eligible to retire at various points in time. Then the percentage of workers
eligible to retire can be assessed by location, job code, or level on the corporate
hierarchy. The goal is to see if some areas, levels, or regions will be more
at risk than others. If the results are shocking (and sometimes they are), then
the data may convince a skeptical CEO that something must be done to develop
talent—and preserve the specialized knowledge, gained from experience,
of those who are about to leave—in areas deemed particularly at risk.
Reasons for a Succession Planning and Management
Program
Why should an organization support a systematic SP&M program? To answer
that question I updated a survey that I sent out in 1993 for the first edition of
this book. (The first survey was mailed to 350 randomly selected members of
the ASTD in October 1993.) The survey for the second edition of this book was
mailed in December 1999 to 742 members of the Society for Human Resources
Management (SHRM). A follow-up mailing was sent in January 2000 to SHRM
members, and a second follow-up mailing went out in February 2000. The
survey for the third edition of this book was sent out in early 2004 to members
of the International Society for Performance Improvement (ISPI), and the results
were compiled in July 2004. Exhibit 1-3 presents demographic information
about the respondents’ industries from the 2004 survey; Exhibit 1-4 charts
the sizes of the respondents’ organizations; Exhibit 1-5 presents information
about the respondents’ job functions; and Exhibit 1-6 summarizes the respondents’
perceptions about the chief reasons their organizations operate systematic
SP&M programs. These reasons are discussed further, in order of their
importance, in the sections that follow. Each reason corresponds to a possible
goal to be achieved by the SP&M program.
Reason 1: Contribute to Implementing the Organization’s Strategic
Business Plans
Succession planning and management should not be conducted in a vacuum;
rather, it should be linked to, and supportive of, organizational strategic plans,
human resource plans, human resource development plans, and other organizational
planning activities. Perhaps for this reason, my survey respondents

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
21
Exhibit 1-3. Demographic Information About Respondents to a 2004
Survey on Succession Planning and Management: Industries
Question: In what industry is your organization classified?
Industry Frequency Percentage
Manufacturing 2 9.09%
Transportation/
Communication/
Electric/Gas 1 4.55%
Retail Trade 1 4.55%
Finance/Insurance/Real Estate 5 22.73%
Healthcare 1 4.55%
Government/Armed Forces 6 27.27%
Other 6 27.27%
Total 22 100.00%
Note: Not all respondents chose to answer this question.
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).
Exhibit 1-4. Demographic Information About Respondents to a 2004
Survey on Succession Planning and Management: Size
Question: How many people does your organization employ?
Organization Size Frequency Percentage
0–99 2 9.09%
100–249 2 9.09%
250–499 2 9.09%
500–1999 5 22.73%
2000–4999 5 22.73%
5000 or more 6 27.27%
Total 22 100.00%
Note: Not all respondents chose to answer this question.
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).
indicated that the most important reason to sponsor systematic SP&M is to
‘‘contribute to implementing the organization’s strategic plan.’’
Strategic planning is the process by which organizations choose to survive
and compete. It involves formulating and implementing a long-term plan by
which the organization can take maximum advantage of its present internal
organizational strengths and future external environmental opportunities

22 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 1-5. Demographic Information about Respondents to a 2004
Survey on Succession Planning and Management: Job Functions of
Respondents
Question: What is your job function?
Job Function Frequency Percentage
Trainer or Training Manager 10 45.45%
Human Resource Manager 7 31.82%
Other 5 22.73%
Total 22 100.00%
Note: Not all respondents chose to answer this question.
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning Practices. Unpublished survey results (University Park,
Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).
while minimizing the effects of present internal organizational weaknesses and
future external environmental threats.
To implement a strategic plan, organizations require the right people
doing the right things in the right places and at the right times. Without them,
strategic plans cannot be realized. Hence, leadership identification and succession
are critical to the successful implementation of organizational strategy.
Particularly at top management levels, as Thomas Gilmore explains, ‘‘performance
criteria are rarely cut and dried. They often flow from a strategic plan
which the chief executive is responsible for developing and carrying out.’’ 19 At
least five different approaches may be used to integrate strategic plans and
succession plans 20 :
1. The Top-Down Approach. Corporate strategy drives SP&M. Leaders
identified through a systematic SP&M process support the successful
implementation of strategy.
2. The Market-Driven Approach. Succession planning and management is
governed by marketplace needs and requirements. As necessary talent
is required to deal with competitive pressures, it is sought out.
3. The Career Planning Approach. Succession planning and management
is tied to strategic plans through individual career planning processes.
In consultation with their organizational superiors and others, individuals
examine their own career goals in light of the organization’s strategy
and make decisions about how they can best contribute to emerging
organizational needs while also improving their own chances for eventual
advancement.
4. The Futuring Approach. Succession planning and management becomes
a vehicle for anticipating talent needs stemming from corporate
strategy. It is viewed as a way to scan external environmental conditions

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
23
Exhibit 1-6. Reasons for Succession Planning and Management Programs
Question: There are many reasons decision-makers may wish to establish a Succession
Planning program in an organization. For each reason listed in the left column
below, please circle a response code in the right column indicating how important
you believe that reason to be for your organization. Use the following scale: 1
Not at all important; 2 Not Important; 3 Somewhat Important; 4 Important;
5 Very Important.
Reasons for Sponsoring Succession Planning
Importance in Your Organization
(Mean Response)
Contribute to implementing the organization’s
strategic business plans. 4.56
Identify replacement needs as a means of targeting
necessary training, employee education,
and employee development. 4.44
Increase the talent pool of employees. 4.33
Provide increased opportunities for highpotential
workers. 4.22
Tap the potential for intellectual capital in the
organization. 4.11
Help individuals realize their career plans within
the organization. 3.89
Encourage the advancement of diverse groups
—such as minorities or women—in future jobs
within the organization. 3.67
Improve employee morale. 3.33
Improve employees’ ability to respond to
changing environmental demands. 3.22
Cope with the effects of voluntary separation
programs—such as early retirement offers and
employee buyouts. 2.78
Cope with effects of downsizing. 2.44
Decide what workers can be terminated without
damage to the organization. 2.22
Reduce headcount to essential workers only. 2.00
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).

24 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
and match the organization’s internal talent to the demands created by
those conditions.
5. The Rifle Approach. Succession planning and management is focused
on solving specific, identifiable problems confronting the organization,
such as higher-than-expected turnover in some organizational levels or
job categories. (One trend is to single out and track the turnover of
high potentials in the organization, which is called critical turnover.)
Consider what role SP&M should play in supporting the strategic plans of
your organization. In doing that, realize that ‘‘there is no one universal approach
that works well across all companies; rather, effective companies match
their succession strategies to their business strategies.’’ 21
Related to strategic planning is human resource planning (HRP), which
is ‘‘the process of analyzing an organization’s human resource needs under
changing conditions and developing the activities necessary to satisfy these
needs.’’ 22 HRP is comprehensive in scope, examining an organization’s workforce
and work requirements. One result of HRP should be a long-term plan
to guide an organization’s personnel policies, programs, and procedures. 23
Few authorities dispute the growing importance of HRP. As Manzini and
Gridley note, ‘‘The need for people with increasingly specialized skills, higher
managerial competencies, and commitment to new levels of excellence, with
professional qualifications in disciplines that did not exist a few decades
ago—at costs commensurate with their contribution to organizational objectives—is
and will continue to be the overriding ‘business’ concern of the organization.’’
24 Succession planning and management is integrally related to HRP,
though SP&M is usually focused more on leadership needs and leadership
skills. Many techniques and approaches that have evolved for use in HRP may
also be applied to SP&M.
Succession planning and management should focus on identifying and developing
critically important leadership talent. Moreover, SP&M may rely on
means other than planned learning or promotion from within to meet talent
requirements. For instance, critical succession needs may be met by external
recruitment, internal transfer, or other means.
Reason 2: Identify ‘‘Replacement Needs’’ as a Means of Targeting
Necessary Training, Employee Education, and Employee Development
The second reason cited by survey respondents for organizations to sponsor
systematic SP&M is to ‘‘identify ‘replacement needs’ as a means of targeting
necessary training, employee education, and employee development.’’ In
other words, SP&M becomes a driving force to identify justifiable employee
training, education, and development needs. Training helps employees meet
their current job responsibilities; employee education prepares them to ad-

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
25
vance to future responsibilities; and employee development can be a tool for
individual enlightenment or organizational learning.
Reason 3: Increase the Talent Pool of Promotable Employees
Respondents in organizations sponsoring systematic SP&M cited the third
most important reason as to ‘‘increase the talent pool of promotable employees.’’
Succession planning and management formalizes the process of preparing
people to fill key positions in the future. Of course, the term talent pool
may mean a group of individuals—rather than one identifiable successor—
from which possible successors for key positions may be selected.
Reason 4: Provide Increased Opportunities for ‘‘High Potential’’
Workers
My survey respondents indicated that the fourth important reason to sponsor
systematic SP&M is to ‘‘provide increased opportunities for ‘high potential’
workers.’ ’’ Although definitions of high potentials (HiPos) may differ, they
are usually regarded as those employees who have the potential for future
advancement. Hence, a very important reason for SP&M is to identify appropriate
ways to accelerate HiPo development and improve the retention of talented
people with potential. 25 A few important retention strategies are
summarized in Exhibit 1-7.
Reason 5: Tap the Potential for Intellectual Capital in the Organization
Intellectual capital refers to the value of the human talents in an organization.
Tapping the potential for intellectual capital was cited as the fifth most important
reason for an SP&M program in an organization. SP&M is thus important
in making and realizing investments in intellectual capital in the organization.
Reason 6: Help Individuals Realize Their Career Plans Within the
Organization
Organizations make a substantial investment in the training of their employees.
Employee performance may improve with experience as individuals advance
along a learning curve in which they master organization-specific and
job-specific knowledge. When individuals leave an organization, their loss can
be measured. 26 If they remain with one employer to realize their career plans,
then the employer benefits from their experiences. In this sense, then, SP&M
can serve as a tool by which individuals can be prepared for realizing their
career plans within the organization. That reason was cited by my survey respondents
as the sixth most important for organizations to sponsor systematic
SP&M.

26 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 1-7. Strategies for Reducing Turnover and Increasing Retention
Possible Causes of Turnover
People leave the organization
because they:
Possible Strategies for
Increasing Retention
Are dissatisfied with their Assess the extent of this problem by
future prospects in the organi-
using attitude surveys (paper-based or
zation or believe they have
online), by using exit interviews with
better prospects for the future
departing workers, and by running
in another organization.
selected focus groups to gather information.
Give people hope by establishing and
communicating about a succession
planning and management program.
Establish or improve job posting programs,
job rotations, and other efforts to
give people more exposure and visibility
within the organization.
Improve communication about the future
of the organization and what that
might mean for individuals in it.
Dislike their supervisors and/ Assess the extent of this problem by
or their supervisors’ approach
using attitude surveys (paper-based or
to supervision.
online) and by using exit interviews with
departing workers.
Improve supervisory training, with special
emphasis on addressing sources of
dissatisfaction that influence turnover.
Establish or improve job posting programs,
job rotations, and other efforts to
give people more exposure and visibility
within the organization.
Dislike the kind of work that Assess the extent of this problem by
they do or the kind of assign-
using attitude surveys (paper-based or
ments that they have been
online), by using exit interviews with
given.
departing workers, and by running
selected focus groups to gather information.
Establish or improve job posting programs,
job rotations, and other efforts to
give people more exposure and visibility
within the organization.

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
27
Dislike their wage or salary Assess the extent of this problem by
level, believe it is not competi-
using attitude surveys (paper-based or
tive, or believe they are not
online), by using exit interviews with
compensated in a way com-
departing workers, and by running
mensurate with their contribu-
selected focus groups to gather infortions.
mation.
Conduct regular wage and salary surveys
outside the organization.
Clarify the organization’s philosophy of
rewards (‘‘Do we want to pay only at
competitive levels? If so, why?’’).
Make use of innovative reward and
compensation practices that go beyond
mere considerations of wages to include
alternative reward and alternative
recognition programs and ‘‘cafeteria
rewards’’ tailored to individual needs.
Are stressed out or burned out Assess the extent of this problem by
from too much work or too
using attitude surveys (paper-based or
little personal rest and recre-
online), by using exit interviews with
ational time.
departing workers, and by running
selected focus groups to gather information.
Take steps to add a component on
work-life balance in descriptions of
high-potentials and high performance
and communicate that change to the organization.
Add to the social life of the organization
by stepping up social activities and reexamining
to whom and how work is
allocated.
Reason 7: Encourage the Advancement of Diverse Groups
The workforce in the United States is only becoming more diverse, reflecting
the nation’s increasingly diverse population. Unfortunately, not all workers
have historically been treated equally or equitably. Discrimination, while prohibited
by federal and state laws, still occurs. Indeed, the realization of that
prompted Supreme Court Justice Thurgood Marshall to explain that, as a black
in America in 1991, he did not feel free. 27 While reactions to that view may
vary, there is increasing recognition of a need to promote multiculturalism,
which involves increasing the consciousness and appreciation of differences

28 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
associated with the heritage, characteristics, and values of many different
groups, as well as respecting the uniqueness of each individual. In this approach,
diversity has a broad meaning that encompasses sex and ethnic
groups along with groups based on such attributes as nationality, professional
discipline, or cognitive style. 28
Perhaps as an indication of increasing recognition that organizations have
a responsibility to pursue diversity at all levels, respondents to my survey indicated
that ‘‘encouraging the advancement of diverse groups’’ was the seventh
most important reason for organizations to sponsor systematic SP&M. Many
organizations build in to their SP&M programs special ways to accelerate the
development of protected labor classes and diverse groups.
Reason 8: Improve Employee Morale
Succession planning and management can be a means by which to improve
employee morale by encouraging promotion from within. Indeed, promotions
from within ‘‘permit an organization to utilize the skills and abilities of individuals
more effectively, and the opportunity to gain a promotion can serve as an
incentive.’’ 29 Once that goal is achieved, the promoted employee’s example
heartens others. Moreover, particularly during times of forced layoffs, promotions
from within and ‘‘inplacement’’ (movements from within of individuals
otherwise slated for layoff ) can boost morale and can help offset the negative
effects of ‘‘survivor’s syndrome.’’ 30
Reason 9: Improve Employees’ Ability to Respond to Changing
Environmental Demands
A ninth reason to sponsor systematic SP&M is to ‘‘improve employees’ ability
to respond to changing environmental demands,’’ according to the respondents
to my survey. ‘‘One role of the leader,’’ writes Gilmore, ‘‘is to shield
the organization from ambiguity and uncertainty so that people can do their
work.’’ 31 Organizations sponsor SP&M as one means by which to prepare people
to respond to—or even anticipate—changing environmental demands.
People groomed for key positions transform the ambiguity and uncertainty of
changing external environmental demands into vision and direction.
Reason 10: Cope with the Effects of Voluntary Separation Programs
My respondents identified ‘‘coping with the effects of voluntary separation
programs’’ as the tenth most important reason that organizations sponsor systematic
SP&M. Voluntary separation is closely related to forced layoffs and is
often a preliminary step to it. In a voluntary separation, employees are offered
incentives to leave the organization—such as prorated pay by years of service

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
29
or years added to retirement. Like a forced layoff, a voluntary separation requires
work to be reallocated as productive employees leave the organization.
That requires some effort to identify ‘‘successors.’’ Hence, SP&M can be valuable
in identifying how—and to whom—work should be reallocated after
workforce restructuring.
Reason 11: Cope with the Effects of Downsizing
An eleventh reason cited by survey respondents for organizations to sponsor
systematic SP&M is to ‘‘cope with effects of downsizing.’’ Downsizing has
been—and continues to be—a fact of life in corporate America. While not as
widely publicized as it once was, downsizing, the evidence suggests, has continued
unabated since before the first edition of this book was published in
1994. Middle managers and professionals have been particularly affected.
While jobs may be eliminated, work does not go away. As a consequence, there
is often a need to identify those who can perform activities even when nobody
is assigned special responsibility for them. Succession planning and management
can be a tool for that purpose.
The respondents to my survey confirm that organizations have continued
to undergo radical workforce restructuring in recent years, a trend first pinpointed
in the 1994 edition of this book. (See Exhibit 1-8.)
Reason 12: Decide Which Workers Can Be Terminated Without
Damage to the Organization
When making hiring decisions, employers have long considered an individual’s
potential for long-term advancement, as well as his or her suitability for
Exhibit 1-8. Workforce Reductions Among Survey Respondents
Question: In the last 5 years, has your organization experienced organization
change? Circle all responses in the right column below that apply.
Organization Change Frequency Percentage
A Layoff 11 21.57%
An Early Retirement Offer 8 15.69%
A Reduction in Force 11 21.57%
A Hiring Freeze 13 25.49%
Reduction by Attrition 17 33.33%
Others 2 3.92%
Total 51 100.00%
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).

30 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
filling an immediate job vacancy. Perhaps for this reason, then, survey respondents
cited ‘‘deciding which workers can be terminated without damage to
the organization’’ as the twelfth most important reason for organizations to
sponsor SP&M.
Reason 13: Reduce Headcount to Essential Workers Only
The thirteenth reason for organizations to sponsor succession planning and
management, as cited by my survey respondents, is to ‘‘reduce headcount to
essential workers only.’’ In an age of fierce competition, processes must be
reengineered to decrease cost, reduce cycle time, and increase quality and
output. Processes must be reexamined in light of results required, not activities
that have traditionally been performed. In such environments, ‘‘companies
don’t need people to fill a slot, because the slot will only be roughly
defined. Companies need people who can figure out what the job takes and
do it, people who can create the slot that fits them. Moreover, the slot will keep
changing.’’ 32 Headcount will also shift to keep pace with shifting requirements.
Best Practices and Approaches
Numerous studies have been conducted of SP&M in recent years. 33 Exhibit 1-9
summarizes some of the key best practices identified from those studies.
There are numerous approaches to SP&M. They may be distinguished by
direction, timing, planning, scope, degree of dissemination, and amount of
individual discretion.
Direction
Who should make the final decisions in SP&M? The answer to that question
has to do with direction. Atop-down approach to succession planning and
management is directed from the highest levels. The corporate board of directors,
CEO, and other top managers oversee program operations—with or without
the assistance of a part-time or full-time SP&M coordinator, a leadership
development specialist, or a human resource generalist assigned to help with
the program. The highest-level leaders make decisions about how competence
and performance will be assessed for present positions, how future competence
and potential will be identified, and what developmental activities—if
any—will be conducted with a view toward preparing individuals for advancement
and building the organization’s bench strength of leadership talent.
In contrast, a bottom-up approach to SP&M is directed from the lowest
levels. Employees and their immediate supervisors actively participate in all
activities pertaining to SP&M. They are also on the lookout for promising people
to assume leadership positions. Decisions about SP&M are closely tied to

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
31
Exhibit 1-9. A Summary of Best Practices on Succession Planning and
Management from Several Research Studies
Based on several research studies of SP&M programs, best practices are:
Best Practices According to Robert M. Fulmer
Deploying a Succession Management Process
Best-practice organizations make succession planning an integral corporate
process by exhibiting a link between succession planning and overall business
strategy. This link gives succession planning the opportunity to affect the corporation’s
long-term goals and objectives.
Human resources is typically responsible for the tools and processes associated
with successful succession planning. Business or line units are generally responsible
for the ‘‘deliverables’’—i.e., they use the system to manage their own staffing
needs. Together, these two groups produce a comprehensive process.
Technology plays an essential role in the succession planning process. Ideally,
technology serves to facilitate the process (make it shorter, simpler, or more flexible)
rather than becoming the focus of the process or inhibiting it in any way.
Identifying the Talent Pool
Best-practice organizations use a cyclical, continuous identification process to
focus on future leaders.
Best-practice organizations use a core set of leadership and succession management
competencies.
Engaging Future Leaders
Best-practice organizations emphasize the importance of specific, individualized
development plans for each employee.
Individual development plans identify which developmental activities are needed,
and the ‘‘best practice’’ firms typically have a mechanism in place to make it
simple for the employee to conduct the developmental activities. Typically, divisional
human resource leaders will monitor employee follow-up in developmental
activities.
Best-practice partners rely on the fundamental developmental activities of coaching,
training, and development most frequently and utilize all developmental activities
to a much greater extent than the sponsor organizations.
In addition to traditional executive education programs, best-practice partners
increasingly use special assignments, action learning, and Web-based development
activities.
Source: Robert M. Fulmer, ‘‘Choose Tomorrow’s Leaders Today: Succession Planning Grooms Firms for Success.’’ Downloaded
on 19 July 2004 from http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/021/succession.html. Used with permission.
(continues)

32 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 1-9.
(continued)
Key Best Practices According to William Rothwell
Use a ‘‘big picture roadmap or model’’ to guide the effort.
Ensure hands-on involvement by the CEO and other senior leaders.
Use competency models to clarify what type of talent the organization’s leaders
want to build.
Develop and implement an effective performance management system.
Lead the target by clarifying what competencies will be needed for the future if
the organization is to achieve its strategic objectives.
Use individual development plans to narrow developmental gaps.
Develop descriptions of the values and ethical standards required and assess
people relative to those as well as competencies.
Build a viewpoint that high-potential talent is a shared resource rather than owned
by specific managers.
Use leadership development efforts to build shared competencies needed for the
future.
Source: William Rothwell, Ed., Effective Succession Management: Building Winning Systems or Identifying and Developing Key
Talent (Lexington, Mass.: The Center for Organizational Research [A division of Linkage, Inc.]). See http://www.cfor.org/News/
article.asp?id4. Used with permission.
Four Key Best Practices According to Chief Executive Magazine
1. Identify. Find HiPo candidates in the organization by using consistent, objective
criteria.
2. Diagnose. Assess individual candidates’ strengths and weaknesses compared to
the organization’s needs.
3. Prescribe. Provide the right development to build competencies in the organization.
4. Monitor. Make sure that the succession process works to build leaders over time.
Source: ‘‘Succession Management: Filling the Leadership Pipeline,’’ Chief Executive, April 2004, pp. 1, 4. Used with permission.
individual career-planning programs, which help individuals assess their present
strengths and weaknesses and future potential. Top managers receive and
act on decisions made at lower levels.
A combination approach attempts to integrate top-down and bottom-up
approaches. Top managers are actively involved in establishing SP&M procedures,
and remain involved in the SP&M program. Employees and their immediate
supervisors are also actively involved in every step of the process. Some
effort is made to integrate SP&M and individual career planning. Often, a suc-

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
33
cession plan without a career plan is a wish list because designated HiPos may
not aspire to the career goals to which managers think they should aspire. A
career plan without a succession plan is a road map without a destination.
Timing
How much time is devoted to SP&M issues—and when is that time devoted to
it? The answer to that question has to do with timing. Succession planning and
management may be conducted fitfully, periodically, or continuously. When
handled fitfully, systematic SP&M does not exist because no effort is made to
plan for succession—with the result that every vacancy can become a crisis.
When handled periodically, SP&M is carried out on a fixed schedule—usually
quarterly or annually. Often it distinctly resembles an employee performance
appraisal program, which is typically part of the SP&M effort. Managers complete
a series of forms that may include a performance appraisal, an individual
potential assessment (or full-circle, multirater assessment), an individual development
plan (IDP), and a replacement chart for their areas of responsibility.
This information is then turned over to the human resources department and/
or to an individual assigned responsibility for SP&M.
When handled continuously, SP&M requires ongoing decision making, information
gathering, and action taking. Less attention is devoted to forms than
to results and developmental activities. Employees at all levels are expected to
contribute to the continuous improvement of themselves and others in the
organization through mentoring, networking, sponsorship, coaching, training,
education, development, and other means.
Planning
How much planning is conducted for succession? The answer to that question
has to do with the planning component of an SP&M program. Succession
planning and management may be a systematic effort that is deliberately
planned and is driven by a written, organization-wide statement of purpose
and a policy. On the other hand, it may be an unsystematic effort that is left
unplanned and informal. An unsystematic effort is driven by the idiosyncrasies
of individual managers rather than by a deliberate plan and strategy for developing
individuals for advancement and for ensuring leadership continuity.
Scope
How many—and what kinds—of people in the organization are covered by
succession plans? The answer to that question has to do with program scope.
Succession planning and management may range from the specialized to the
generalized. A specialized program targets leadership continuity in selected

34 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
job categories, job levels, functions, or locations. Often, such programs grow
out of crises—such as excessive turnover in selected areas of the organization.
On the other hand, a generalized program aims to prepare individuals for
advancement in all job categories, job levels, functions, and locations. It is
often a starting point for identifying individualized training, education, and
development needs and for meeting individual career goals.
Degree of Dissemination
How many people participate in SP&M processes? The answer to that question
has to do with the program’s degree of dissemination. It is a philosophical
issue that stems from—and influences—the organization’s culture. The degree
of dissemination may range from closed to open. A closed SP&M program is
treated as top secret. Managers assess the individual potential of their employees
without the input of those affected by the assessment process. Decisions
about whom to develop—and how to develop them—are limited to a ‘‘needto-know’’
basis. Individual career goals may—or may not—influence these decisions.
Top managers are the sole owners of the SP&M program and permit
little or no communication about it. Secrecy is justified on two counts: (1)
succession issues are proprietary to the organization and may reveal important
information about strategic plans that should be kept out of the hands of competitors;
and (2) decision-makers worry that employees who are aware of their
status in succession plans may develop unrealistic expectations or may ‘‘hold
themselves hostage.’’ To avoid these problems, decision-makers keep the
SP&M process and its outcomes confidential.
On the other hand, an open SP&M program is treated with candor. Work
requirements, competencies, and success factors at all levels are identified and
communicated. The SP&M process—and its possible outcomes—is described
to all who ask. Individuals are told how they are regarded. However, decisionmakers
do not promise high performers with high potential that they are guaranteed
advancement; rather, they send the message that ‘‘you must continue
to perform in an exemplary way in your current job and take active steps to
prepare yourself for the future to benefit from it. While no promises will be
made, preparing yourself for the future will usually help you qualify for advancement
better than not preparing yourself.’’
Amount of Individual Discretion
How much say do individuals have in assessing their current job performance
and their future advancement potential? The answer to that question has to
do with the amount of individual discretion in a succession planning and
management program. There was a time in U.S. business when it was assumed
that everyone wanted to advance to higher levels of responsibility and that

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
35
everyone was willing to relocate geographically whenever asked to do so. Such
assumptions are no longer safe to make: not everyone is willing to make the
sacrifices that go with increased responsibility; not everyone is willing to sacrifice
work-life balance; not everyone is willing to relocate due to the complexities
of dual-career families and situations where elderly parents require care.
Mandated succession planning and management ignores individual career
goals. Decision-makers identify the best candidates for jobs, regardless of
individual preferences. Whenever a vacancy occurs, internal candidates are
approached first. While given right of refusal, they may also be pressured to
accept a job change for the good of the organization. Verified succession planning
and management appreciates the importance of the individual in SP&M.
Decision-makers identify desirable candidates for each job and then verify
their interest in it by conducting career planning interviews or discussions.
When a vacancy occurs, internal candidates are approached, but decision-makers
are already aware of individual preferences, career goals, and interests. No
pressure is exerted on the individual; rather, decision-makers seek a balance
in meeting organizational succession needs and individual career goals.
Ensuring Leadership Continuity in Organizations
There are two main ways to ensure leadership continuity and thereby fill critically
important positions. These may be generally classified as traditional and
alternative approaches. Each can have important implications for SP&M.
Hence, each warrants brief review.
Traditional Approaches
In 1968, Haire noted that people can make only six types of job movements in
any organization: in (entry), out (termination), up (promotion), down (demotion),
across (lateral transfer), or progress in place (development in the current
position). 34 Any one—or all—of these traditional approaches can, of
course, be used as a means to meet succession needs for key positions.
Moving people into an organization (entry) is associated with recruitment
and selection. In short, ‘‘hiring off the street’’ is one way to find successors for
key positions. However, people hired from outside represent a gamble. They
have little stake in the organization’s status quo, though they may have valuable
knowledge in which the organization is otherwise deficient. They may
generate conflict trying to put new ideas into action. That conflict may be
destructive or constructive. Top managers may be reluctant to hire more than
a certain percentage of outsiders for key positions because they do represent
a gamble. Their track records are difficult to verify, and their ability to work
harmoniously in a new corporate culture may be difficult to assess. If they fail,
outsiders may be difficult to terminate both because managers can be reluctant

36 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
to ‘‘fire’’ people and because wrongful discharge litigation is an issue of growing
concern.
Moving people out of an organization (termination) is associated with layoffs,
downsizings, reductions in force, firings, and employee buyouts. It is generally
viewed negatively, continuing to carry a social stigma for those ‘‘let go’’
and to be a public relations concern for organizations that regularly terminate
individuals with or without cause. Yet, if properly used, termination can be an
effective tool for removing less-than-effective performers from their positions,
thereby opening up opportunities for promising high-potential employees
with proven track records.
Moving people up in an organization (promotion) is associated with upward
mobility, advancement, and increased responsibility. Succession planning
and management has long been linked with this approach more than
any other. Indeed, replacement charts—while increasingly outdated—remain
tools of SP&M in many organizations. They usually imply an upward progression
from within the organization—and often within the same division,
department, or work unit. Career maps show the competency requirements
necessary for advancement and are often substituted now for replacement
charts. Job-posting programs can also be paired with replacement charting or
career maps so as to communicate vacancies and provide a means of allowing
movement across functions, departments, and locations.
Promotion from within does have distinct advantages: it sustains (or improves)
employee morale, and it smoothes transitions by ensuring that key
positions are filled by those whose personalities, philosophies, and skills are
already known to others in the organization. However, experts advise limiting
the percentage of positions filled through internal promotion. One reason is
that it tends to reinforce the existing culture. Another reason is that it can end
up perpetuating the racial, sexual, and ethnic composition already present in
the leadership ranks.
There are other problems with strict promotion-from-within approaches
to succession planning and management. First, exemplary job performance in
one position is no guarantee of success in a higher-level position. Requirements
at different organizational levels are not identical—and that is particularly
true in management. Effective promotion from within requires planning
and rarely occurs by luck.
Moving people down in an organization (demotion), like terminating
them, is commonly viewed negatively. Yet it, too, can be an effective source of
leadership talent on some occasions. For instance, when an organizational
unit is being disbanded, effective performers from that unit may fill vacancies
in other parts of the organization. Individuals may even accept demotions voluntarily
if they believe that such moves will increase their job security or improve
their long-term career prospects.
Moving people across an organization (lateral transfer) is becoming more

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
37
common in the wake of downsizing. (It is sometimes linked to what has come
to be called inplacement. 35 ) That, too, can be a valuable means by which to
cross-fertilize the organization, giving new perspectives to old functions or
activities. Job rotations, either temporary or permanent moves from one position
to others as a means of relieving ennui or building individual competencies,
are a unique form of transfer that can also be used in succession planning
and management. 36
Finally, progress in place (development in the current position) represents
a middle ground between lateral transfer and upward mobility. It has become
more common as opportunities for advancement have diminished in the wake
of fierce global competition. Progress in place is based on the central premise
that no job—no matter how broad or complex—fully taps individual potential.
As a result, individuals can be developed for the future while remaining where
they are, doing what they have always done, and gradually shouldering new
duties or assignments. Stagnation is thus avoided by ‘‘loading’’ the job horizontally
or vertically. (Horizontal loading means adding job responsibilities
similar to what the individual has already done; vertical loading means offering
new job responsibilities that challenge the individual to learn more.)
Related to progress in place is the notion of dual career ladders in which
individuals may advance along two different career tracks: a management
track (in which advancement is linked to increasing responsibility for people)
and a technical track (in which advancement is linked to increasingly sophisticated
responsibility within a given function or area of expertise). The organization
may establish special rewards, incentives, and compensation programs to
encourage advancement along dual career tracks.
Alternative Approaches
Experienced managers know that there is more than one way to fill a critical
position. 37 Job movements, described in the previous section, represent a traditional
approach, commonly associated with SP&M. Alternative approaches
are probably being increasingly used as managers in cost-sensitive organizations
struggle to meet SP&M challenges while finding themselves restricted in
the external hiring and internal promoting that they may do.
One alternative approach might be called organizational redesign. When a
vacancy occurs in a key position, decision-makers do not automatically ‘‘move
someone into that place’’; rather, they break up the work duties and reallocate
them across the remaining key positions or people. The desired effect is to
reduce headcount while holding results constant. It also develops the remaining
key people by giving them exposure to a new function, activity, or responsibility.
However, if rewards do not match the growing workload, exemplary
performers who have been asked to do more may grow disenchanted. There

38 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
is also a limit to how much can be loaded on people before they are incapable
of performing effectively.
A second alternative approach is process redesign. Decision-makers do not
automatically assume that a key position needs to be replaced when it becomes
vacant; rather, they review that function from top to bottom, determining
whether it is necessary at all—and if it can be done in new ways that require
fewer people.
A third alternative approach is outsourcing. Rather than assume that all
key positions need to be performed internally, decision-makers periodically
reassess whether activities can be more cost-effectively handled externally. If
headcount can be reduced through outsourcing, the organization can decrease
succession demands.
A fourth alternative approach involves trading personnel temporarily with
other organizations. This approach builds on the idea that organizations can
temporarily trade resources for their mutual benefit. Excess capacity in one
organization is thus tapped temporarily by others. An advantage of this approach
is that high performers or high potentials who are not immediately
needed by one organization can be pooled for use by others, who usually
offset their salaries and benefits. A disadvantage is that lending organizations
risk losing these talented workers completely if they are spirited away by those
having greater need of their services and greater ability to reward and advance
them.
A fifth alternative approach involves establishing talent pools. Instead of
identifying one likely successor for each critical position, the organization sets
out to develop many people for many positions. That is accomplished by mandated
job rotations so that high potentials gain exposure to many organizational
areas and are capable of making multifaceted contributions. While that
sounds fine in theory, there are practical difficulties with using this approach.
One is that productivity can decline as new leaders play musical chairs and
learn the ropes in new organizational settings.
A sixth alternative approach is to establish two-in-the-box arrangements.
Motorola has been known to use this approach. ‘‘Since most Motorola businesses
are run by a general manager and an assistant general manager, the
assistant slot is used to move executives from one business to another for a
few years so they can gain a variety of experiences.’’ 38 A form of overstaffing
that would not be appealing to some organizations, this approach permits
individual development through job rotations while preserving leadership
continuity. It is akin to forming an executive team in which traditional functional
senior executives are replaced by a cohesive team that collectively makes
operating decisions, effectively functioning in the place of a chief operating
officer. 39
A seventh alternative approach is to establish competitive skill inventories
of high-potential workers outside the organization. Rather than develop organizational
talent over time, an organization identifies predictable sources of

What Is Succession Planning and Management?
39
high-potential workers and recruits them on short notice as needed. A disadvantage
of this approach is that it can engender counterattacks by organizations
that have been ‘‘robbed’’ of talent.
Of course, there are other alternative ways by which to meet successor
needs in key positions. Here is a quick review of a few of them:
▲ Temping. The organization makes it a practice to hire individuals from
outside on a short-term basis to fill in during a search for a successor.
The ‘‘temps’’ become candidates for consideration. If they do not work
out, however, the arrangement can be severed on short notice.
▲ Job Sharing. An experienced employee in a key position temporarily
shares the job with another as a means of on-the-job training—or assessing
how well the candidate can perform.
▲ Part-Time Employment. Prospective candidates for key positions are
brought in on a part-time basis. They are carefully assessed before employment
offers are made.
▲ Consulting. Prospective candidates for key positions are brought in as
consultants on projects related to the position duties. Their performance
is carefully assessed before employment offers are made.
▲ Overtime. Prospective candidates from within the organization are
asked to work in other capacities in addition to their current jobs. This
represents overtime work. The employer then assesses how well the
individuals can perform in the key positions, making allowances for the
unusual pressure under which they are functioning.
▲ Job Rotation. Prospective candidates for key positions are developed
from within by rotating, for an extended time span, into another job or
series of jobs in preparation for the future.
▲ Retirees. The organization looks to individuals with proven track records
to return to critical positions temporarily—or permanently. This
is likely to be a key focus of interest in the future. 40
The important point about SP&M is that numerous approaches may be
used to satisfy immediate requirements. However, a continuing and systematic
program is necessary to ensure that talent is being prepared inside the organization.
As a starting point for describing what is needed to decision-makers in
your organization, start with addressing the Frequently Asked Questions
(FAQs) appearing in Appendix I at the end of this book.
Summary
This chapter opened with six dramatic vignettes to illustrate the importance of
succession planning and management (SP&M), which was defined ‘‘as any effort
designed to ensure the continued effective performance of an organiza-

40 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
tion, division, department, or work group by making provision for the
development, replacement, and strategic application of key people over time.’’
A succession planning and management program was defined as a ‘‘deliberate
and systematic effort by an organization to ensure leadership continuity in key
positions, retain and develop intellectual and knowledge capital for the future,
and encourage individual advancement.’’ Succession planning and management
is proactive and should not be confused with more limited-scope and
reactive replacement planning, which is a form of risk management.
Succession planning and management is important for several reasons: (1)
the continued survival of the organization depends on having the right people
in the right places at the right times; (2) as a result of recent economic restructuring
efforts in organizations, there are simply fewer people available to advance
to the top ranks from within; (3) succession planning and management
is needed to encourage diversity and multiculturalism in organizations and to
avoid ‘‘homosocial reproduction’’ by managers; and (4) succession forms the
basis for communicating career paths, establishing development and training
plans, establishing career paths and individual job moves, communicating upward
and laterally, and creating a more comprehensive human resources planning
system.
Organizations sponsor systematic succession planning and management
programs for various reasons. The three most important, based on my 2004
survey, are:
▲ To contribute to implementing the organization’s strategic business
plans
▲ To identify ‘‘replacement needs’’ as a means of targeting necessary training,
employee education, and employee development
▲ To increase the talent pool of promotable employees
Approaches to succession planning and management may be distinguished
by direction, timing, planning, scope, degree of dissemination, and amount of
individual discretion. Succession needs may be met through traditional and
alternative approaches. Succession planning and management should be
linked to—and supportive of—strategic plans, human resource plans, human
resource development plans, and other organizational planning activities.

C H A P T E R 2
TRENDS INFLUENCING SUCCESSION
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
Succession planning and management (SP&M) must be carried out against
the backdrop of increasingly dynamic organizations. 1 Those organizations are
responding, either proactively or reactively, to changes occurring in their external
environments. As Leibman explains, ‘‘today’s dynamic environment
filled with global competition and business discontinuities defines the arena
in which succession planning must flourish. To do so, a much more active
orientation is required, one that is better characterized by succession management
and its emphasis on ongoing and integrated processes.’’ 2 For Leibman,
succession management is more active than succession planning and must be
carried out in a way that is tied to organizational strategy and is responsive
enough to deal with rapidly changing organizational settings. That is an accurate
view. To be effective, SP&M programs must anticipate—and not just react
to—the changes wrought by an increasingly dynamic business environment.
Many trends drive the future workplace and workforce. Among them are
the following 3 :
1. Changing Technology
2. Increasing Globalization
3. Continuing Cost Containment
4. Increasing Speed in Market Change
5. The Growing Importance of Knowledge Capital
6. An Increasing Rate and Magnitude of Change
These trends demand a new role for managers. They also call for a new,
more strategic role for HR practitioners. 4 Trends such as these frame the future
of SP&M efforts, and effective SP&M programs are built to help organizations
manage and even capitalize on the effects of these trends.
This chapter examines key trends influencing SP&M. The chapter opens
with an activity for you to consider on the drivers of change and trends. It
then focuses on answering the question, ‘‘What trends are influencing SP&M?’’
41

42 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
The chapter directs attention to ten key trends exerting special influence on
SP&M:
1. The Need for Speed
2. A Seller’s Market for Skills
3. Reduced Loyalty Among Employers and Workers
4. The Importance of Intellectual Capital and Knowledge Management
5. The Importance of Values and Competencies
6. More Software to Support Succession
7. The Growing Activism of the Board of Directors
8. Growing Awareness of Similarities and Differences in Succession Issues
Globally
9. Growing Awareness of the Similarities and Differences of Succession
Programs in Special Venues: Government, Nonprofit, Education, Small
Business, and Family Business
10. Managing a Special Issue: CEO Succession
The chapter then offers conclusions about what these trends mean for SP&M.
But first, take a moment to rate your organization on its handling of SP&M
against the backdrop of the competitive environment. Complete the assessment
questionnaire appearing in Exhibit 2-1. When you finish, score the results
of your assessment. Then continue reading the chapter.
The Ten Key Trends
Trend 1: The Need for Speed
Time has emerged as a key strategic resource. 5 If you doubt that, then consider
how often the phrase ‘‘reduction in cycle time’’ is used in companies today.
Also consider how fast the speed of processing time in computers is advancing.
Slashing the time it takes to get results is seen as a goal in its own right. This
includes:
▲ Finding faster ways to transform basic research into applied research so
as to create new products or services and thereby beat competitors to
production or service delivery
▲ Entering new markets faster
▲ Reducing unnecessary or redundant steps in the production process
through process improvement

Trends Influencing Succession Planning and Management
43
Exhibit 2-1. An Assessment Questionnaire: How Well Is Your Organization
Managing the Consequences of Trends Influencing Succession Planning
and Management?
Directions: Use this questionnaire to structure your thinking about how well your
organization is positioned to manage the consequences of key trends influencing
SP&M. For each item listed in the left column below, rate how well you feel your
organization is prepared to manage the consequences of the trends as they may
influence SP&M.
Use the following scale to rate your opinions:
1 Not at all prepared to manage the consequences of the trend as it influences
SP&M.
2 Very unprepared to manage the consequences of the trend as it influences
SP&M.
3 Unprepared to manage the consequences of the trend as it influences
SP&M.
4 Somewhat prepared to manage the consequences of the trend as it influences
SP&M.
5 Prepared to manage the consequences of the trend as it influences SP&M.
6 Well prepared to manage the consequences of the trend as it influences
SP&M.
7 Very well prepared to manage the consequences of the trend as it influences
SP&M.
If you wish, ask decision-makers in your organization to complete this assessment
questionnaire individually. Then compile the results and feed the results back to the
decision-makers so that they may see their collective views.
The Questionnaire
How Well Is Your Organization Positioned to
Manage the Consequences of the Trend as It
Influences SP&M?
Not at
Very Well
All Prepared
Prepared
Trend 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
1. The Need for Speed 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
2. A Seller’s Market for Skills 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
3. Reduced Loyalty Among
Employers and Workers 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
(continues)

44 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 2-1. (continued)
4. The Importance of Intellectual
Capital and Knowledge
Management 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
5. The Key Importance of
Values and Competencies 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Scoring
Add up the totals
of the columns above
and place the sum in
the box at right
V
Interpreting the Score
If your score is lower than 19, then your organization is not well prepared to manage
the consequences of the trends as they may influence SP&M.
▲ Improving, through just-in-time inventory methods, the time match between
the need for raw materials and their use in production so as to
reduce inventory holding costs
▲ Reducing the time it takes to fill an order or ship a product from producer
to consumer
Speed is only likely to become more important in the future. That sensitivity
to speed is affecting human resources (HR) practices as well. Many companies
keep statistics to see how long it takes to do the following 6 :
▲ Justify a position.
▲ Recruit for and fill a vacancy.
▲ Find talent to meet immediate needs or synchronize efforts.
▲ Train people.
In a more stable era, it might have been acceptable to permit a long lead
time between the justification and filling of a position, or the selection of a
qualified person and the realization of full productivity from that worker following
training. But stable times are gone. Time is a resource easily wasted,
and people must be found and oriented so that they can become productive
as quickly as possible.
Trend2:ASeller’sMarketforSkills
Employers in the United States, as in many other parts of the world, have
traditionally taken workers for granted. Many managers still assume that, if

Trends Influencing Succession Planning and Management
45
their organizations will only pay enough, they can always find the people they
need to fill any position. But that assumption is not always valid anymore.
There are several reasons why.
First, the U.S. population is aging. 7 Fewer workers are entering at the bottom
of organizational pyramids because there are fewer workers of traditional
entry-level age. Those new workers have a work ethic and values different from
those of previous generations. Many prize a balance of work and personal life
that does not match the frenetic pace of many organizations today, where
number of work hours for the average manager are on the rise. 8
Second, more people are reaching traditional retirement ages. Some authorities
contend that this will lead to a leadership shortage as senior managers,
traditionally the oldest age group, take advantage of generous retirement
plans. 9 Other authorities, however, caution against assuming that people will
retire at traditional ages in the future, since retirement plans and other benefits
are less secure than they once were. 10
Third, until recently the U.S. economy sustained a broad expansion for the
longest period in history. Many groups have benefited from this expansion.
While there may be evidence that the rich are getting richer and the poor are
getting poorer, 11 it is also true that (at least at the time this book goes to press)
virtually anyone in America who wants a job can find one somewhere. This
means that workers can afford to be more selective about where they work,
which creates a seller’s market for skills.
In response, many U.S. organizations have instituted retention programs
to hold down turnover. 12 That is ironic, considering that many organizations
in the 1990s implemented staff reduction plans through downsizings, layoffs,
employee buyouts, and early retirement programs in order to slash payroll
and benefit costs. But, while downsizings continue in the wake of rapid market
changes and corporate mergers, acquisitions, and takeovers, many decision-makers
in organizations are now looking for ways to attract and retain
talent. That is particularly true in information technology jobs, where a muchpublicized
labor shortage is thought to be a driver for future mergers and
acquisitions.
The change in attitude has spawned interest in ways to give people hope
for the future. An SP&M program is one such way, of course. A reinvented
career planning and development program is another, related way.
Trend 3: Reduced Loyalty Among Employers and Workers
There was a time when employees believed that they would get a job with one
company and stay with that company until retirement. A stable employment
record was considered an advantage during job interviews. Likewise, employers
often assumed that, when they extended a job offer, they were establishing
a long-term relationship with the worker. Even poor performers were toler-

46 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
ated, and sometimes moved out of the way and into harmless positions to
preserve workers’ feelings of trust and security with their employers.
This, of course, is no longer the case. One result of the downsizing of the
1990s was that employers changed the employment contract. 13 As competitive
conditions became more fierce, organizational conditions became less stable.
No longer were employers making a long-term commitment to their employees.
A legacy of this change is that employees have become more interested in
short-term gains, especially in salaries, titles, development opportunities, and
benefits. They want immediate rewards for good performance, since they distrust
their employers’ abilities to reward them in the future for hard work
performed in the present. 14 They have changed from showing a tolerance for
delayed gratification to demanding immediate gratification. This change in the
employment contract has profound implications for traditional SP&M practices.
Employees can no longer trust their employers to make good on promises
of future advancement. And, given that attitude, employers can no longer
count on high potentials or exemplary performers patiently performing for
long periods before receiving rewards, advancement, or professional development.
Speed is now as important in managing succession issues as it is in managing
other aspects of organizational practice. Managers must manage against a
backdrop with the possibility of losing valuable talent if they do not identify it
quickly and offer prompt rewards and development opportunities. 15
Trend 4: The Importance of Intellectual Capital and Knowledge
Management
Intellectual capital can be understood, at least in one sense, as the collective
economic value of an organization’s workforce. 16 The effective use of intellectual
capital is knowledge management. 17 It is important to emphasize that, as
the speed of decision making increases in organizational environments and
operations, intellectual capital increases in value because it is essential for
customers to deal with workers who know how to serve them quickly and
effectively. This demands improved knowledge management of the workforce.
While land, capital, and information can be readily obtained from other
sources—and, on occasion, leased, outsourced, or purchased—the organization’s
workforce represents a key asset. Without people who know what the
organization does to serve its customers and how it does that, no organization
could continue to function. In one example I like to use with my students, I
ask them this question: What would a university be without its faculty, administrators,
staff, and students? The answer is that it would be nothing more than
assets ready for liquidation—land, buildings, equipment, and capital. Without
the people, there would be no way to achieve the mission of the university by
teaching, research, and service.

Trends Influencing Succession Planning and Management
47
The same principle applies to business organizations. While traditional
managers may view people as a cost of doing business, thought leaders realize
that people represent the only asset that really matters in a competitive environment.
People dream up new products and services. People make the leap
from the results of basic research to the commercialization of applied research.
People come up with technological advancements and use those advancements
to achieve improved productivity and quality. People serve the customers,
make the products, ship them to consumers, bill them, deposit the
proceeds, and manage the organization’s resources. Without people, the competitive
game is lost. That is a lesson that is, unfortunately, too easy to forget
at a time when many people are awed by rapid technological advancement.
Of course, those impressive technological advancements are pointless unless
people make use of them.
The implications of intellectual capital and knowledge management are
important for SP&M. In a sense, succession planning and management is a
means to an end. It is a tool of knowledge management, a means of ensuring
that intellectual capital is properly serviced, retained, cultivated, and protected.
Trend 5: The Importance of Values and Competencies
People in organizations have high expectations of their leaders. These expectations
are unlikely to diminish in the future. People want leaders who can get
results and can, at the same time, model appropriate ethics. For these reasons,
values and competencies have emerged as crucial to success in organizations.
As a later chapter will define them, values can be understood to mean
deeply held beliefs. In the wake of high-profile scandals in the U.S. government,
in other governments such as those of Japan and China, and in many
businesses, values have emerged as a key issue of importance in organizational
settings. Many multinational companies, for instance, have tried to address
cultural differences by establishing core values honored internationally under
one corporate umbrella. 18
Competencies, while having different definitions, 19 have also emerged as
key to management decision making, human resource practice, 20 and SP&M
programs. Values represent a moral dimension to the way leadership is exercised
and work is performed. 21 Competencies can represent the distinguishing
features between high performers and average or below-average performers.
More flexible than work activities or tasks, competency models are the glue
that holds together a succession planning effort. The use of competency models
is a distinguishing characteristic between traditional and cutting-edge
SP&M programs. As work becomes more dynamic and divorced from the traditional
‘‘boxes’’ found on organization charts, there must still be a way to describe
what performance is expected. Competency models have the advantage
of providing that flexibility.

48 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Trend 6: More Software to Support Succession
There is more software available to support SP&M, though it sometimes masquerades
under such alternative names as talent management, talent development,
orhuman capital software. That is both a blessing and a curse. It is a
blessing because, when well formulated and implemented, software permits
individuals and groups that are dispersed geographically to participate. Software
can facilitate decision making on competency identification, values
clarification, 360-degree assessment, individual development planning, identification
of developmental resources to help build competencies (and thereby
close developmental gaps), track individual progress (and thus encourage accountability),
and even measure individuals’ progress and the support provided
by immediate supervisors.
But it can be a curse because some people believe that, when they buy a
technology solution, they are also buying the solutions to their succession
problems. They think that the software will give them ready-made, off-theshelf,
one-size-fits-all competency models, 360-degree assessments, individual
development plans, tracking systems, and developmental methods. Of course,
that is not true. Technology is like an empty glass. HR practitioners and senior
managers cannot avoid the responsibility of filling the glass with corporateculture-specific
competencies, overseeing individual progress, providing realtime
mentoring and coaching, and offering much more than is embedded in
the technology. In short, technology can ease the work, but it will not remove
it. (Chapter 12 of this book describes unique issues associated with the application
of online technology to SP&M.)
Trend7:TheGrowingActivismoftheBoardofDirectors
Boards of directors are beginning to take a more active role in SP&M. The
evidence clearly points in that direction. One reason has been the Sarbanes-
Oxley Act of 2002. (See Exhibit 2-2.) A key effect of that act is to increase
board accountability in business operations. And, of course, finding qualified
successors for CEOs on down is an important issue that corporate boards must
perennially address. 22
Trend 8: Growing Awareness of Similarities and Differences in
Succession Issues Globally
One size does not fit all—and that is as true of succession planning as it is of
anything else. Unfortunately, it is a lesson that some multinational corporations
(MNCs) have never learned. An all-too-common scenario is that the corporate
headquarters in Europe, the United States, or Japan will establish
succession planning guidelines and then roll them out worldwide, forgetting

Trends Influencing Succession Planning and Management
49
Exhibit 2-2. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has swept the corporate world, leading to widespread
change. 1 Introduced in the wake of the spate of scandals that began with
Enron, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act does have an impact on succession issues. It has
prompted corporate boards of directors to take a more active role in succession
issues. It has also prohibited practices that were previously regarded as retention
strategies for key executives, such as permitting personal loans to executives or
allowing CEOs to remain in the room as corporate boards deliberate financial packages.
2 Sarbanes-Oxley has also put real teeth in corporate codes of conduct and
strengthened ethics programs in corporate settings. One indicator: ‘‘the ethics officer
association, a Waltham, Mass.–based organization for managers of ‘ethics,
compliance and business conduct programs,’ has seen membership jump more
than 25 percent since last year.’’ 3
Notes
1. Steven C. Hall, ‘‘Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002,’’ Journal of Financial Service
Professionals 57:5 (2003), 14.
2. Dale Buss, ‘‘Corporate Compasses,’’ HR Magazine 49:6 (2004), 127–128,
130, 132; Robert J. Grossman, ‘‘HR on the Board,’’ HR Magazine 49:6 (2004),
56–63.
3. Buss, ‘‘Corporate Compasses,’’ p. 128.
that the world is a big place and national cultural differences do play a role in
effective succession planning practices. The result is that, whatever the approach,
it is only partly effective. An English-language-only literature search
uncovered articles about SP&M in Europe, 23 the United States, 24 Asia, 25 the
Middle East, 26 and New Zealand. 27 As Hickey notes in writing of SP&M in
China, ‘‘a continued negligence of a systemic succession plan is seemingly
retarding the growth and career development of domestic employees to localize
the organization.’’ 28 The same could, unfortunately, be said of many other
locales around the world.
What are some of the problems that a global rollout may uncover? Here is
a list of some typical problems and their causes:
▲ U.S. firms will generally prize individualists who can claim credit for
what they have done on their own. That is not true in other cultures, where a
willingness to ‘‘stick one’s head above the crowd may mean it is cut off.’’ In
short, allowances may have to be made for cultural differences in which individual
efforts are prized in those cultures where individualism is prized, while
an individual’s willingness and skill to influence groups may have to be identified
and rewarded in more collectivistic cultures where team efforts are prized.

50 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
▲ Some European firms—and some firms in developing nations—will
prize ‘‘family heritage.’’ Ultimately, coming from the European tradition of
aristocracy, this principle means that ‘‘not all people are created equal.’’ Some
people, as George Orwell once noted in Animal Farm, are ‘‘more equal than
others’’ by virtue of birth family, socioeconomic status, schools attended, and
social networks developed from school and family connections. In short, it
means that one’s family may mean that one is destined to be a senior executive
no matter what corporate leaders in other nations may want because that is
just the way things are done locally.
If a universal approach will not work globally, then what approach will
work? The answer is that there is no simple answer. Goals may be established
at corporate headquarters. But, if the approach is to be effective, corporate
leaders should launch facilitated sessions that bring together regional leaders
to have input on the goals, hear about best practices in Western nations (which
may have the most advanced approaches), and (most importantly) discover
what results are to be achieved by those practices. Then the regional leaders
should engage in facilitated discussions where they can ‘‘invent’’ local approaches
that will ‘‘work’’ in their home cultures, and will comply with the
employment laws of each nation.
It is true that such an approach takes time, resources, patience, and hard
work. But in the long run, that approach has the advantage of leading to
‘‘global goals’’ but using ‘‘local approaches to achieve those goals.’’ It will
work.
The alternative is to do as many companies do and just ‘‘roll out something’’
from corporate headquarters. Local people will shake their heads in
wonderment, amazed that global corporate leaders know so little about the
broad differences in local cultures, local realities, and even local labor laws. It
just undermines the credibility of corporate leaders. As globalization exerts
increasing influence, these ‘‘one size fits all’’ approaches will be increasingly
out of step with good business practice. That is especially true when rapidly
advancing technology makes it possible to have videoconferenced and realtime
online discussions cross-culturally to facilitate ideas and approaches.
Trend 9: Growing Awareness of Similarities and Differences of
Succession Programs in Special Venues: Government, Nonprofit,
Education, and Small or Family Business
Just as one size of SP&M program may not fit all internationally, one approach
to SP&M will not work in all venues. While there are many similarities in effective
SP&M programs across business, government, and nonprofit sectors, there
are some important differences as well. The same is true in settings such as
educational institutions, small business, and family business.

Trends Influencing Succession Planning and Management
51
Government
There are two key differences in succession planning programs between business
and in governmental settings. (And it is worth pointing out that governmental
entities may themselves differ across international, federal, state,
municipal, county, and other governmental bodies.)
One difference is that some governmental entities have civil service systems
that prohibit (by law) the naming of individuals to fill positions without
competitive job searches. In some jurisdictions, all jobs must be posted. Individuals
are then ranked according to their qualifications compared to the requirements
listed on job descriptions. That approach means, in practical
terms, that a government entity can commit to develop anyone who wishes to
be developed—a method sometimes called a talent-pool approach. But identifying
individual successors in advance may not be possible.
A second difference has to do with who may be regarded as the key customers
of the effort. In business, the CEO plays the single most important role
as customer. But in some governmental entities, the agency director is a political
appointee who carries out the will of an elected official. In practical terms,
that means that the most important owners of the SP&M process will be those
government civil servants who do not change with the winds of every political
election. They possess the collective institutional wisdom of the organization
in their heads, and they must be appealed to on the grounds of a legacy if a
government-agency SP&M program is to work. In many cases, government
succession programs bear different titles and are called workforce planning or
human capital management initiatives. 29
Nonprofit
Nonprofit entities share characteristics with business and government. For that
reason, an effective SP&M program in a nonprofit organization will most likely
be a hybrid of what works in the private and public sectors. The senior-most
leader must back the effort if it is to succeed, and (in that respect) the nonprofit
SP&M program is like the private sector. But dedicated leaders who have
made their careers in the organization, and are committed to its worthwhile
mission, must also back the effort. And in that respect, the SP&M program in
a nonprofit organization is akin to that of a governmental entity.
Education
Educational institutions vary widely in type, just as governmental entities do.
One size SP&M program will not fit all. What works in a local school system
may not work at a world-famous research university. 30 But it is clear that large
universities are unique for the simple reason that many people must move to
other higher educational institutions if they are to be promoted from department
head to dean, dean to provost or chancellor, or chancellor or provost to

52 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
president. That makes it difficult for one institution to justify expenditures on
identifying and grooming talent for the future, since the beneficiaries of such
efforts would most likely be other institutions. (In a school district, on the
other hand, it may be possible to groom people to become principals because
many such positions may be available.) Having said this, however, some
higher-educational institutions have committed to leadership development
programs to groom talent, and it is likely to be seen more in the future, for the
simple reason that so many college professors and university administrators
are at, or near, retirement age.
Small or Family Business
Succession planning in family businesses and succession planning in small
businesses are specialized topics. Much has actually been written about
them. 31 It should be noted that not all family businesses are small businesses
and not all small businesses are family businesses. Some large, well-known
companies like Ford were originally family businesses. In Europe or Asia, many
large companies began—and some still are—essentially family dynasties. That
is also true in some companies in the United States. And small businesses may
be initiated by individuals without families or in partnerships of otherwise
talented but unrelated entrepreneurs.
Family businesses exert an enormously powerful influence on the U.S.
economy. Consider the following 32 :
It has been estimated that family businesses
generate approximately nine out of 10 new
jobs. But despite the significant role they play
in supporting the nation’s economy, only
about one in three survives to the second
generation. The estimate of successful transfers
to the third generation ranges from only
10 to 20%.
Family businesses represent a special succession challenge for the simple
reason that many factors come into play. A founding entrepreneur, who is
usually a parent and spouse, establishes a business. But what happens when
he or she passes from the scene? Who carries on the legacy? In some cultures—
and even in some parts of the United States—the principle of primogeniture
is still very much apparent. Primogeniture is the view that the eldest son
should be the primary inheritor. Based on the way that aristocratic titles have
been passed down historically, it poses special problems in family succession,
for the simple reason that the eldest son of a founding entrepreneur may (or
may not) be the best equipped—by skills, vision, or motivation—to run the
business.

Trends Influencing Succession Planning and Management
53
Family succession has several issues associated with it. One issue centers
on management. A second issue centers on tax and inheritance issues. A third
issue centers on legal issues. A fourth issue centers on what might be called
family psychology. So, the management issue has to do with answering this
question: ‘‘Who is best equipped to run the business when the founder passes
from the scene?’’ While founders may feel inclined to leave the business to a
spouse or to an eldest son, that person may (in fact) not be the best choice.
The real issue has to do with a conflict between obligation to family and
obligation to the business. Savvy founders will not necessarily let the obligation
to the family prevail. If they do, they may destroy the business. What
happens if, upon the founding entrepreneur’s sudden death or disability, the
spouse or eldest child is ill-equipped to manage the business? The answer is
likely to be bankruptcy or a sell-off. That may not be best for the business, the
employees, or the communities in which that business functions.
The second and third issues have to do with accounting and legal issues.
Should the business be handed over before the founder’s demise, in which
case it is subject to gift tax, or should the handoff occur after the founder’s
demise, in which case it is subject to inheritance tax? Those questions are best
addressed by competent financial and tax advisors. At the same time, if the
business is handed over, it must be done legally. That requires competent legal
advice to write a will that cannot be easily ‘‘broken’’ or a handoff agreement
that makes the founder’s relationship to the business clear.
The fourth and final issue has to do with family psychology. If the founder
decides to hand over a controlling share of the business to one child in preference
to others, for instance, then the reasons for that should be clear before
his or her demise and the issue of financial fairness and equity addressed at
that time. If the founder decides to hand over a controlling share of the business
to a child and ignore the living spouse’s claim on the assets, that is also a
problem. The point to be made here is that conflicts should be worked
through while all parties are alive. At times that may require the help of a
skilled family psychologist. To ignore the problem is to beg trouble—and perhaps
beg the dissolution of the business upon the founder’s death or disability
as family members squabble bitterly and ceaselessly over money.
Trend 10: Managing a Special Issue: CEO Succession
CEO succession has emerged as a special theme and research topic within the
succession literature. 33 In that respect it is like other unique succession issues,
such as the impact of cultural differences in making succession decisions,
small business succession, and family business succession. The special interest
in CEO succession should come as no big surprise. It has been a prominent
topic for research, discussion, and investor interest. In fact, it has been a focus
of attention in much the same way that succession to the throne has preoccu-

54 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
pied citizens in those nations where a monarch is the titular head of state. That
analogy between monarch in a nation and CEO of a company is particularly
apt when thinking about the successors of founding entrepreneurs in small
businesses, where a CEO’s unexpected and sudden loss can have particularly
devastating effects on the business. 34
CEO succession has also become a particular center point for concern recently
as CEO turnover globally has increased. 35 The findings of a study of CEO
turnover, 36 reported in The Financial Executive, revealed that:
▲ Involuntary CEO successions increased by more than 70 percent from
2001 to 2002.
▲ Of all CEO departures globally in 2002, 39 percent were forced—and
that compared to 35 percent in 2001.
▲ CEO turnover increased 192 percent in Europe and 140 percent in the
Asia/Pacific region but only 2 percent in North America since 1995.
▲ The Asia/Pacific region accounted for the largest change (19 percent),
nearly 1 in 5 CEO departures.
▲ North America accounted for only 48 percent of all successions worldwide
in 2002 but accounted for a significantly higher 64 percent in
2001.
▲ Corporate boards have toughened their stance on CEO performance,
since the board dismissed CEOs in 2002 when shareholder returns were
only 6.2 percent below median regionally adjusted averages but at 11.9
percent below median regionally adjusted averages in 2001.
One important conclusion that can be drawn from these results is that
organizations must pay more attention to ways to select CEOs and assimilate
them. 37 Indeed, CEO succession is likely to continue to be a focus of attention.
Most experts predict that the pace and magnitude of change in the world will
continue to increase. As that happens, corporate boards are likely to be more
demanding—and less forgiving—of CEO performance. That, in turn, will probably
continue the trend of dropping job tenure for CEOs.
What Does All This Mean for Succession Planning and
Management?
What will these trends mean for succession planning and management? The
answer to that question is that, to be effective in the future, succession planning
and management must be based on sensitivity to the need for speed, 38
must align organizational needs with individual needs in order to be responsive
to a seller’s market for skills, must emphasize a present orientation that
will work in business settings where neither individuals nor organizations possess
long-term loyalty, must recognize and cultivate the critical importance in

Trends Influencing Succession Planning and Management
55
competitive success of the organization’s intellectual capital, must rely on (but
not be led by) technology, and must be sensitive to unique needs by culture,
industry or economic sector, and level on the chain of command.
Summary
As noted at the opening of this chapter, succession planning and management
must be carried out against the backdrop of increasingly dynamic organizations.
This chapter examined ten key trends exerting special influence on succession
planning and management. The chapter then offered conclusions
about what these trends mean for succession planning and management.
The next chapter makes the case for a newer approach to succession planning
and management, one that is responsive to—and helps organizations be
more proactive to—new competitive realities.

C H A P T E R 3
MOVING TO A
STATE-OF-THE-ART APPROACH
What characteristics do state-of-the-art succession planning and management
(SP&M) programs share in common? Read the cases appearing in Appendix II
and then consider the summary of best-practice characteristics described
below. While the cases do not necessarily describe every best practice, they are
helpful in seeing how succession planning and management is handled among
various organizations, in various industries.
Characteristics of Effective Programs
What characteristics of SP&M programs have most contributed to their effectiveness?
Spend a moment to brainstorm the answer to that question. Then
compare your answer to that question with the list of characteristics appearing
below. (The list is not necessarily complete and is not meant to be arranged in
order of importance.)
▲ Characteristic 1: Top Management Participation and Support. Top
management participation and support must be strongly evident. Their personal
involvement—and even that of the corporate board—should motivate
participants and ensure that other members of the management team devote
time and effort to the succession planning program. Without the CEO’s personal
attention, SP&M will probably receive far less attention than it presently
does in these companies.
▲ Characteristic 2: Needs-Driven with External Benchmarking. Some effort
should be made to compare best practices in other organizations to the
organization where leaders feel the need to act on succession issues.
▲ Characteristic 3: Focused Attention. Organizational leaders should not
allow succession planning to occur casually on its own. A systematic effort is
focused on accelerating the development of individuals with verified advancement
potential. It is worth emphasizing that it is not appropriate to assume
that successful performance at one level guarantees, or is even an indicator of,
success at higher levels of responsibility.
56

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
57
▲ Characteristic 4: Dedicated Responsibility. If a goal deserves attention,
someone must be held responsible for achieving it and accountable for the
consequences of it. That is as true of SP&M as it is of anything else.
▲ Characteristic 5: Succession Planning and Management Extends to All
Levels. SP&M should extend to all organizational levels. Note that the greatest
emphasis is placed in some organizations at the lowest management levels,
where the most positions and people exist. In the other cases, attention is
devoted to levels where business needs (or risks of loss due to retirement) are
greatest.
▲ Characteristic 6: A Systematic Approach. In most organizations, continuing
processes should be put in place to focus attention on succession planning.
▲ Characteristic 7: A Comparison of Present Performance and Future Potential.
Management succession should not be a function of personal favoritism,
seniority, or even demonstrated track record. Instead, the organization
should possess some means by which to compare present job performance
and future potential. The organization should identify individual developmental
needs for top-level talent.
▲ Characteristic 8: Clarification of High-Level Replacement Needs. Organizational
leaders should make the effort to determine the retirement plans of
key officers. (In this book the term key job incumbent refers to an individual
presently occupying a key position.) In that way, the organization is better able
to identify developmental time spans for specific key positions.
▲ Characteristic 9: An Obligation to Identify and Prepare Successors.
Each executive should take responsibility, and be held accountable, for identifying
and preparing successors.
▲ Characteristic 10: Specific Developmental Programs Established and
Conducted. Individuals thought to have high potential should participate in
planned developmental programs to prepare them for the future, without necessarily
being promised anything. Programs of this kind are often used in large
corporations and may extend over many years. 1 Such programs may be viewed
in three stages, which are based on the level of participants’ experience with
the organization. In stage 1, there is a relatively large pool of prospective high
potentials. They range from little experience through eight years with the organization.
They are taught general management skills. Only 6 percent of those
in stage 1 make it to stage 2, where they participate in tailor-made developmental
experiences, intensive on-the-job development, and specialized
courses, and they occupy important positions. A smaller percentage of those
in stage 2 progress to stage 3, where they occupy important positions while
they are carefully groomed for more senior positions.
▲ Characteristic 11: High Potentials Work While Developing. The organization
should not emphasize classroom or online training or off-the-job development
to the exclusion of action learning or learning from experience. 2 For

58 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
this reason, high-potential employees are expected to produce while participating
in the developmental program.
▲ Characteristic 12: Developmental Programs Establish Familiarity with
Who, What, When, Where, Why, and How. Large companies are so large that
developmental experiences are, in part, established to familiarize future leaders
with the organization’s environment. That is a key emphasis of some
developmental programs. As a result, participants become much more knowledgeable
about the corporate culture—who does what, when they do it, where
business-related activities are performed, why they are worth doing, and how
they are accomplished. In this way, the internal development program emphasizes
knowledge, skills, and abilities unique to the organization and essential
to success in performing at higher organizational levels.
▲ Characteristic 13: Developmental Experiences Encourage Critical
Questioning. Top managers who address high-potential employees find that
they are occasionally confronted with critical questions about ‘‘the way we
have always done it.’’ Critical questioning encourages creative thinking by top
managers, as well as by high-potential employees.
▲ Characteristic 14: Succession Planning Emphasizes Qualities Necessary
to Surpass Movement to the Next Higher-Level Job. Exemplary SP&M programs
emphasize more than merely preparing individuals to move from one
‘‘box’’ on the organization chart to the next higher-level ‘‘box.’’ Instead, they
emphasize the building of competencies leading to advancement beyond the
next job. They are, thus, long term and strategic in scope and tend to build
competencies in line with company business objectives and values.
▲ Characteristic 15: Formal Mentoring Emphasized. Mentoring and
coaching have been the subject of growing attention in recent years as management
writers have recognized that individual development is more heavily influenced
by the on-the-job work environment than by off-the-job training,
education, or development experiences. 3 (Indeed, as much as 90 percent of
an individual’s development occurs on the job. 4 ) A mentor or coach provides
advice about dealing with challenges presented by the work environment, including
interpersonal problems and political issues. ‘‘Mentoring occurs when
a talented junior person forms an attachment to a sensitive and intuitive senior
person who understands and has the ability to communicate with the individual.’’
5 Mentors are teachers. They are not in positions of authority over their
protégés or mentees. Nor do they necessarily serve as special advocates and
cheerleaders for their protégés, as sponsors do. Mentors are typically chosen
by the protégé or mentee; hence, most mentoring occurs informally. However,
some organizations sponsor formal mentoring programs in which an effort
is made to match promising junior employees with more experienced, highperforming
senior employees.

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
59
Other Characteristics
On your list, you may have identified other characteristics of an effective SP&M
program. In reality, of course, there are no ‘‘right’’ or ‘‘wrong’’ characteristics.
Indeed, there isn’t a foolproof formula for success. But there are certain essentials
to a good succession process 6 :
▲ A Systematic (rather than anecdotal) Way of Identifying Candidates
▲ Cross-Divisional Sharing of People and Information
▲ Leadership That Rewards Managers for Promoting (rather than holding
on to) Their Best Employees
▲ Career Paths That Move Not Just Up a Specialized Ladder but Across the
Company
▲ Frequent Opportunities for Employees to Accept New Challenges
▲ Recognition That Employees Have a Stake in the Company and Share
Its Successes
In my survey of succession planning practices, I asked about the characteristics
of effective SP&M programs. The survey results are presented in Exhibit
3-1. I have used those results to create a questionnaire, shown in Exhibit 3-2,
which you can use to assess issues for inclusion in the SP&M program in your
organization.
The Life Cycle of Succession Planning and Management
Programs: Five Generations
In my consulting practice, I have discovered that many decision-makers in
organizations that possess no SP&M program would like to leap in a single
bound from no program to a state-of-the-art program. That is rarely possible
or realistic. It makes about as much sense as trying to accelerate an automobile
from a standing stop to 100 miles per hour in one second.
It makes much more sense to think in terms of a phased-in roll-out. The
basis for this roll-out approach is my view that organizations go through a life
cycle of development as they implement SP&M programs. At each generation,
they gain sophistication about what to do, how to do it, and why it is worth
doing.
The first generation of SP&M is a simple replacement plan for the CEO.
This is easiest to sell if the organization does not have such a plan, since most
CEOs realize what might happen to their organizations if they are suddenly
incapacitated. (See Exhibit 3-3.) The target of the SP&M program in the first
generation is the CEO only, and involving the CEO ensures that he or she
(text continues on page 66)

Exhibit 3-1. Characteristics of Effective Succession Planning and Management Programs
A
B
C
D
E
Characteristics of Effective Succession
Planning Programs
How Your Organization:
Tied the succession planning program
to the organizational strategic
plans?
Tied the succession planning program
to individual career plans?
Tied the succession planning program
to training programs?
Established measurable objectives
for program operation (such as number
of positions replaced per year)?
Identified what groups are to be
served by the program, in priority
order?
Does Your Organization’s
Succession Planning
Program Have This
Characteristic?
Yes
No
How Important Do You Believe
This Characteristic to Be
for an Effective Succession
Planning Program?
Not at
All Important
Very
Important
1 2 3 4 5 6
(Mean Response)
89% 11% 4.89
56% 44% 4.00
67% 33% 3.67
67% 33% 3.67
33% 67% 3.44

F
G
Established a written policy statement
to guide the program?
Articulated a written philosophy
about the program?
78% 22% 3.78
78% 22% 3.67
H Established a program action plan? 100% 0% 4.56
I
J
K
L
Established a schedule of program
events based on the action plan?
Fixed responsibility for organizational
oversight of the program?
Fixed responsibility of each participant
in the program?
Established incentives/rewards for
identified successors in the succession
planning program?
67% 33% 4.22
89% 11% 4.00
78% 22% 3.78
11% 89% 3.22
(continues)

Exhibit 3-1. (continued)
M
N
O
P
Q
R
Characteristics of Effective Succession
Planning Programs
How Your Organization:
Established incentives/rewards for
managers with identified successors?
Developed a means to budget for a
succession planning program?
Devised means to keep records for
individuals who are designated as
successors?
Created workshops to train management
employees about the succession
planning program?
Created workshops to train individuals
about career planning?
Established a means to clarify present
position responsibilities?
Does Your Organization’s
Succession Planning
Program Have This
Characteristic?
Yes
No
How Important Do You Believe
This Characteristic to Be
for an Effective Succession
Planning Program?
Not at
All Important
Very
Important
1 2 3 4 5 6
(Mean Response)
11% 89% 3.00
56% 44% 4.00
56% 44% 3.78
33% 67% 4.00
56% 44% 4.11
100% 0% 4.00

S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
Established a means to clarify future
position responsibilities?
Established a means to appraise individual
performance?
Established a means to compare individual
skills to the requirements of
a future position?
Established a way to review organizational
talent at least annually?
Established a way to forecast future
talent needs?
Established a way to plan for meeting
succession planning needs through
individual development plans?
Established a means to track development
activities and prepare successors
for eventual advancement?
Established a means to evaluate the
results of the succession planning
program?
67% 33% 3.89
67% 33% 4.00
44% 56% 3.89
67% 33% 4.00
67% 33% 3.89
56% 44% 3.89
44% 56% 3.89
44% 56% 3.89
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).

64 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 3-2. Assessment Questionnaire for Effective Succession Planning
and Management
Directions: Complete the following Assessment Questionnaire to determine how well
your organization is presently conducting SP&M. Read each item in the Questionnaire
below. Circle (Y) for Yes, (N/A) for Not Applicable, oran(N) for No in the left
column opposite each item. Spend about 15 minutes on the questionnaire. When
you finish, score and interpret the results using the instructions appearing at the end
of the Assessment Questionnaire. Then share your completed Questionnaire with
others in your organization. Use the Questionnaire as a starting point to determine
the need for a more systematic approach to SP&M in your organization.
The Assessment Questionnaire
Circle your
response
below:
In your organization, would you say that SP&M:
Y N/A N 1. Enjoys top management participation, involvement
and support?
Y N/A N 2. Is geared to meeting the unique needs of the organization?
Y N/A N 3. Has been benchmarked with best-in-class organizations?
Y N/A N 4. Is a major focus of top management attention?
Y N/A N 5. Is the dedicated responsibility of at least one highlevel
management employee?
Y N/A N 6. Extends to all levels rather than being restricted to top
positions only?
Y N/A N 7. Is carried out systematically?
Y N/A N 8. Is heavily influenced by a comparison of present performance
and future potential?
Y N/A N 9. Is influenced by identification of high-level replacement
needs?
Y N/A N 10. Has sensitized each executive to an obligation to
identify and prepare successors?
Y N/A N 11. Has prompted the organization to establish and conduct
specific developmental programs that are designed
to accelerate the development of highpotential
employees?
Y N/A N 12. Is guided by a philosophy that high-potential employees
should be developed while working rather than by
being developed primarily through off-the-job experiences?

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
65
Y N/A N 13. Has prompted the organization to focus developmental
programs on increasing the familiarity of highpotential
employees with who does what, when they
do it, where they do it, why they do it, and how they
do it?
Y N/A N 14. Has prompted the organization to focus developmental
programs on the critical questioning of ‘‘the
way things have always been done’’?
Y N/A N 15. Emphasizes the qualities or competencies necessary
to surpass movement to the next higher-level job?
Y N/A N 16. Has prompted your organization to examine, and
perhaps use, formal mentoring?
Y N/A N 17. Is conducted in a systematic way?
Y N/A N 18. Encourages the cross-divisional sharing of people
and information?
Y N/A N 19. Is reinforced by a leadership that actively rewards
managers for promoting (rather than holding on to)
their best employees?
Y N/A N 20. Is supported by career paths that move not just up a
specialized ladder but across a continuum of professional
competence?
Y N/A N 21. Is supported by frequent opportunities for employees
to accept new challenges?
Y N/A N 22. Is driven, in part, by recognition that employees have
a stake in the organization and share its successes?
Y N/A N 23. Has prompted an explicit policy favoring promotion
from within?
Total
Scoring and Interpreting the Assessment Questionnaire
Give your organization 1 point for each Y and a 0 for each N or N/A listed above.
Total the points from the Y column and place the sum in the line opposite to the
word TOTAL above. Then interpret your score in the following way:
(continues)

66 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 3-2. (continued)
Score
Above 20 points
Succession planning and management appears to be
handled in an exemplary manner in your organization.
18–20 points The SP&M efforts of your organization could stand improvement.
However, SP&M is being handled effectively,
for the most part.
14–17 points Succession planning and management is a problem in
your organization. It deserves more attention.
Below 14 points
Your organization is handling SP&M in a crisis mode. It
is very likely that successors for critically important positions
have not been identified and are not systematically
developed. Immediate corrective action is desirable.
properly assumes an important leadership role for the program and does not
try to delegate it prematurely to Human Resources or to other groups.
As I tell my clients, the CEO is the real customer for most SP&M efforts—
and my view is supported by the opinions of members of many boards of
directors. When the SP&M effort begins with the CEO, he or she understands
what is involved in establishing a state-of-the-art SP&M program and is able to
tailor it to suit his or her vision and strategy. Furthermore, he or she sets the
example and sends a powerful message of personal commitment and support
that is needed to make subsequent generations of such an effort successful.
It is worth noting that HR plays an important role. But it is essential to
emphasize that HR does not ‘‘own’’ this effort. The ‘‘owner’’ is the CEO, and
it is a position that (on this topic) he or she cannot delegate. HR leaders can
certainly help: They can coordinate the effort, once leadership by the CEO has
been exercised. They can provide advice and counsel about what to do, why it
should be done, and how it should be done. But the CEO must lead the effort
and be personally committed to it. Lacking the CEO’s personal support, commitment,
and participation, SP&M efforts will fail.
The second generation is a simple replacement plan for the CEO and his
or her immediate reports—that is, the senior leaders of the organization, the
senior executive team. By extending the SP&M effort to the management tier
below CEO and by identifying the successors of that group, senior managers
are involved firsthand in designing and implementing a succession effort.
Since they are the targets of that effort, they understand it, have a chance to
refine it, and develop ownership in it. By actively participating in the effort,
they gain a thorough understanding of it so that they can communicate to
others in the third generation.
A key advantage of using the senior executive team as guinea pigs, so to
speak, is that they are usually already well developed in their positions and are
highly knowledgeable about what it takes to succeed in the business, industry,

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
67
Exhibit 3-3. A Simple Exercise to Dramatize the Need for Succession
Planning and Management
For a dramatic and compelling exercise to emphasize the need for an SP&M program,
ask your CEO or the managers in your organization what the following people
share in common:
Donald Terner, President, Bridge Housing Corp., San Francisco, Calif.
Robert E. Donovan, President and Chief Executive Officer, Abb Inc., Norwalk,
Conn.
Claudio Elia, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Air & Water Technologies
Corp., Somerville, N.J.
Stuart Tholan, President, Bechtel-Europe/Africa/Middle East/Southwest Asia, San
Francisco, Calif.
John A. Scoville, Chairman, Harza Engineering Co., Chicago, Ill.
Leonard Pieroni, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Parsons Corp., Pasadena,
Calif.
Barry L. Conrad, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Barrington Group,
Miami, Fla.
Paul Cushman III, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Riggs International
Banking Corp., Washington, D.C.
Walter Murphy, Senior Vice President, AT&T Submarine Systems Inc., Morristown,
N.J.
Robert A. Whittaker, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Foster Wheeler Energy
International, Clifton, N.J.
Frank Maier, President, Ensearch International Ltd., Dallas, Tex.
David Ford, President and Chief Executive Officer, Interguard Corp. of Guardian
International, Auburn Hills, Mich.
Answer: These were the people on board the plane with Commerce Secretary Ron Brown when it crashed in
1996. Don’t you wonder if they had replacements ready in their organizations?
Used with permission from Nursing Management, 25:6 (June 1994), pp. 50–56, Springhouse Corporation (www.Springnet
.com).
and corporate culture. By participating in the development of the SP&M effort,
they ensure that it fits the corporate culture and aligns with organizational
strategy. What is more, they set an example and, by doing that, send a powerful
message to others in the organization that the SP&M effort is important and
worthy of action, interest, and participation.
The third generation is an SP&M program for middle managers, who are
usually the direct reports of the senior executive team, and perhaps (if the
organization’s leaders support it) for others on the organization chart as well.
It is at this point that the model of SP&M, described later in this chapter (see
Exhibit 3-5), is first widely used. Policies and procedures for SP&M are drafted
if they were not already prepared formally in earlier generations; competency
models by department or hierarchical level are first developed if they were not

68 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
already prepared formally in earlier generations; value statements are crafted;
and other key components of a modern SP&M program are designed, developed,
and refined. By extending to this third tier and by identifying the successors
of that group, middle managers are involved firsthand in designing and
implementing an effort. Since they are the targets of the succession effort, they
come to understand it and develop ownership in it. They also help refine it
for their level and for those below them on the organization chart. The third
generation is the most risky, since more people are involved and many new
policies, procedures, and practices are first established, tested, and implemented.
The fourth generation moves beyond simple replacement plans to focus
on the development of internal talent pools. Internal talent pools are groups
of people inside the organization who are being developed for the future.
Everyone is considered a possible successor for key positions and given such
tools as career maps to help them prepare themselves for the future. In this
generation, succession issues are divorced from the organization chart. Instead
of targeting specific individuals to be successors, the organization’s decision-makers
use the many tools put in place in the third generation. It is
possible in this generation to use competency models, performance appraisals,
individual development plans, full-circle multirater assessments, and other
sophisticated methods to help all workers develop to realize their potential.
The fifth generation focuses on the development of external as well as
internal talent pools. External talent pools are groups of people outside the
organization who are possible sources of talent for the future. Instead of waiting
until key positions come open to source talent, the organization’s decisionmakers
include in their talent pools temporary and contingent workers, retired
workers, outsourcing agents, vendors, consultants, and even (perhaps)
members of their organization’s supply and distribution channels. In short,
decision-makers look around the organization’s external environment to see
what talent exists outside as well as inside their organizations that could be
tapped. In that way, they lead the target and slash the time needed to fill critical
positions.
The fifth generation of SP&M is the most sophisticated. It is not easy—and
usually not even possible—for an organization to make a single leap from
no SP&M effort to a fifth-generation approach. Too much infrastructure and
management support, not to mention the learning that occurs in generations
one through four, are needed to make it work. The risks of failure are far too
high. A better approach is to think in terms of a gradual phase-in, moving to a
generation that meets the needs of the organization. (Not all organizations
need a fifth-generation approach.) That phase-in can occur fastest in organizations
that are small, face a stable market, and possess low turnover in the
management ranks. That phase-in occurs more slowly in organizations that are
larger, face dynamic or fiercely competitive markets, and possess high turnover
in the management (or high potential) ranks.

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
69
Another way to think about generations of succession planning programs
is, of course, possible. Indeed, the Dow Chemical Company Case (described
in Exhibit 3-4) presents such an alternative view of the life cycle of succession
planning and management programs.
Identifying and Solving Problems with Various Approaches
The cases appearing in the Appendix summarize several exemplary approaches
to SP&M in organizations of varying sizes and industry categories.
However, not all organizations handle SP&M as effectively or efficiently. Indeed,
two experts speaking at an American Management Association Human
Resources Conference indicated that succession planning is being woefully
‘‘ignored by a majority of American companies.’’ 7
Many problems bedevil current approaches to SP&M. Exhibit 3-5 summarizes
the chief difficulties in using succession planning that were described by
the respondents to my 2004 survey on succession planning practices. Additionally,
I review seven common problems affecting SP&M programs below.
Problem 1: Lack of Support
‘‘One of the major drawbacks HR managers face in establishing a company
succession plan is the lack of support from top company executives.’’ 8 Indeed,
‘‘the attitude of too many corporation executives is ‘why bother?’ ’’ 9 If top managers
lack a sense of urgency, no SP&M program can be effective.
If top managers are unwilling to support a systematic approach to succession
planning, it cannot succeed. If that is the case, the best strategy is to try
to win over one or more credible idea champions. Especially promising for
those roles are well-respected top managers who have recently—and, if possible,
personally—experienced the work-related problems that stem from having
no successor prepared to assume a critically important position when a
vacancy occurs.
Problem 2: Corporate Politics
A second problem with succession planning is that it can be affected by corporate
politics. Instead of promoting employees with the most potential or the
best track record, top managers—or, indeed, any level of management employee—may
‘‘use the corporate ladder to promote friends and allies, while
punishing enemies, regardless of talent or qualifications.’’ 10 If allowed to operate
unchecked, corporate politics can supplant performance and potential as
an advancement criterion.
(text continues on page 72)

70 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 3-4. The Dow Chemical Company’s Formula for Succession
Ben & Jerry’s, in its challenge to Haagen-Dazs in the great American ice cream
wars, actually considered the issue of the succession of a chief executive through an
essay contest dubbed ‘‘Yo, I wanna be your CEO.’’ Cooler heads prevailed, and
Ben & Jerry’s is now headed by an experienced executive.
Nevertheless, today’s business headlines are too full of corporate embarrassments
in the form of chief executives staying on too long and stifling potential successors
or rivals, divided boards which are often out of touch with shareholders’ interests,
internal power struggles which lead to a mass exodus of talent when a new chief
executive is finally selected, and damage to the company as an all-too-public search
erodes confidence and impedes the smooth running of the business.
Helping to select the right successor is the ultimate obligation of a chief executive.
While this is done in concert with the board of directors, the responsibility for the
quality of candidates and the attractiveness of the job rests with current management.
Among the key tasks addressed by boards, succession is often the most neglected.
This is because the issue arises relatively infrequently.
Succession strategy in most companies must make six transitions:
1. From an Annual Event to a Continuous Process. Companies need to create an
environment of continuous succession ‘‘thinking’’ rather than annual succession
‘‘planning.’’ There should be more frequent senior-management meetings, more
time devoted to follow-up at regular staff meetings, more emphasis on succession
issues in business planning and greater incorporation of succession issues into performance
evaluation and management. For example, managers should be developing
at least one person as their potential replacement.
2. From a Short-Term Replacement Strategy to a Long-Term Development and Retention
Strategy. A balance must be struck between the need for immediate replacements
and the need for a steady supply of ready talent. Employees will obviously
appreciate the attention paid to their development and continuous improvement.
3. From an Emphasis on Whom a Company Has to an Emphasis on What a Firm
Needs. Companies must create an atmosphere in which external talent can be hired
to fill critical skill gaps, independent of job openings. Dow mainly promotes from
within, but, says Popoff, ‘‘the benefit and vigor that accrue to us in matching an
outside hire with a clear internal need is not lost on employees, managers or shareholders.’’
4. From Position Blockage to Appropriate Turnover in Key Positions. Companies must
promote and reward capable managers of people, rather than emphasizing technical
over managerial skills. If all of a company’s managers are good at managing

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
71
people, they can routinely assess the potential of incumbents in key positions, develop
appropriate action plans, avoid positions becoming blocked and generate
appropriate turnover.
5. From Insufficient Bench Strength to a Pool of Ready Talent. Dow has created a
Genesis award to recognize people development. In a company with many highly
competent technical and professional people, the award program provides insight
on who is actually practicing good people management. The Genesis award is
Dow’s most-sought-after award. Winners of the award are introduced at the annual
shareholders’ meeting.
6. From Subjective Evaluation to an Emphasis on Results. Dow has established specific
measurements to evaluate succession results. The measurements include: the
percentage of key jobs which have at least two ready successors; the percentage of
key posts filled externally; the percentage of developmental action plans implemented;
and the extent to which the process contributes positively to business results.
At Dow, all management directors must relinquish their management positions at
the age of 60, or five years after their last significant promotion, whichever is later.
But they remain on the board of directors until they reach the age of 65. During
their final five years on the board, they have no line-management responsibilities
and their pay is stepped down annually to their retirement salary at age 65.
Says Popoff: ‘‘These former members of management are some of the best, toughest,
most knowledgeable, best intentioned and hardest working directors I have
come to know.’’ After years of service with the company, people such as the former
chief executive, the director of research and head of international operations know
where the bodies are buried. They are familiar with all the facts and myths of the
company. Along with the outside directors and the chairman, they play a key role in
ensuring an appropriate selection from the talent pool for all key executive posts.
Board members who are former Dow managers have a special ability to test the
internal heirs apparent and work with them to ensure a smooth transition, or to look
outside objectively if the internal pool of talent is lacking.
Succession planning plays a key role in the company’s ability to pursue its long-term
strategies and achieve lasting results. Clearly, good management does not happen
by itself, and succession planning is critical to its continuation. The good news is
that most firms now give succession planning a lot of attention. The bad news is that
too many companies still fail to get it right.
Time was when companies had different people dealing with career and succession
planning. But succession planning is increasingly being viewed in broader and integrated
terms, not least because firms are now less predictable and it is therefore
relatively pointless to identify specific successors for specific jobs for the future. Con-
(continues)

72 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 3-4. (continued)
tinual restructuring and reallocation of executive responsibilities to meet changing
priorities are now the normal practice. Within this context, companies need to pay
attention to the strategic process of succession management. The Dow Chemical
Company model would appear to have many virtues.
Note: This is a précis of an article entitled ‘‘Reflections on succession,’’ which was originally published in Arthur D. Little’s Prism,
third quarter, 1996, pp. 109–116. The article is based on a presentation that Frank Popoff made to the Chief Executives’ Club of
Boston.
Source: ‘‘The Dow Chemical Company’s Formula for Succession,’’ Human Resource Management International Digest 5:1 (1997),
9–10. Used with permission of Human Resource Management International Digest.
Exhibit 3-5. Chief Difficulties with Succession Planning and Management
Programs
Question: What are the chief difficulties that your organization has experienced with
a succession planning program? Please describe them briefly below.
Identifying the high potentials
Preparing individual development plans
Making succession plans a real workable process that people (managers) actually
use when making decisions, not just a file that is put on a shelf
Pushing succession down in the organization
Senior management positions filled usually by political appointment
The quality of the candidate is not good enough
Getting succession management to flow downward from the executive level to
middle management
Monitoring and evaluating successors
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).
To solve this problem, decision-makers must insist on formal ways to identify
work requirements and assess performance and potential rather than
permit subjective judgments to prevail. (Methods of conducting formal assessments
will be described in later chapters of this book.) Informal judgments
are notoriously prone to numerous problems. Among them are recency bias
(performance or potential is assessed with a heavier-than-desirable emphasis
on recent and singular successes or failures); pigeonholing or stereotyping
(supervisors develop impressions of individuals that are difficult to change);
the halo or horn effect (supervisors are overly influenced in their judgments
of individuals by singular events); the Pygmalion effect (supervisors see what
they expect to see); and discrimination (treating people differently solely as a
function of sex, race, age, or other factors unrelated to job performance). Left

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
73
unchecked, informal judgments may also lead supervisors to pick successors
like themselves (the ‘‘like me’’ bias).
Problem 3: Quick-Fix Attitudes
A third problem with the traditional approach to succession planning is that it
can encourage quick-fix attitudes. Effectiveness is sacrificed to expediency.
That can have far-ranging consequences because ill-chosen leaders can prompt
higher-than-normal turnover among their followers, create employee morale
problems, and even bankrupt an otherwise sound business. Leadership does
matter, and leaders cannot be cultivated quickly or easily. 11 Excellent leaders
can only be cultivated over time.
Problem 4: Low Visibility
Top-level executives do not always see the fast, direct benefits of SP&M. The
further they are removed from daily operations—and numerous direct reports—the
less valuable SP&M can seem to be to them. HR managers will
propose and install various SP&M efforts, but they will often be replaced when
top-level executives see no immediate benefits stemming from them. 12
To solve this problem, succession must be made a high-visibility issue. Further,
it must enjoy the active support—and direct participation—of workers at
all levels. Without showing active support and participating directly, top managers
will have no ownership stake in succession efforts.
Problem 5: The Rapid Pace of Organizational Change
Traditional replacement planning once worked well enough in stable environments
and organizations. In those settings, vacancies could be predicted, candidates
could be trained for targeted jobs, and a homogeneous workforce led
to easy transitions and assured continuity.
But the rapid pace of organizational change has raised serious questions
about the value of the traditional, fill-in-the-box-on-the-organization-chart approach
to replacement-oriented succession planning. Indeed, one management
consultant has asked, ‘‘Is succession planning worth the effort?’’ 13 And
he arrived at this conclusion: ‘‘The simple answer is no. Predicting succession
(over, say, a three-to-five-year time frame) in an era of constant change is fast
becoming an impossibility.’’ 14
To solve this problem, decision-makers need to look beyond a simple technological
solution, such as the use of succession planning software for personal
computers designed to accelerate the organization’s ability to keep pace
with staffing needs and changes. That can help, but more dramatic solutions
are also needed. Possible examples are to focus on work requirements, compe-

74 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
tencies, and success factors so as to maximize the value of developmental activities;
use full-circle, multirater assessments; increase the use of job rotations
to prompt management employees to become more flexible; use action learning
and real-time education to equip management employees with the flexibility
they need to cope with rapid change; establish team-based management so
that key work requirements develop, and are spread across, different individuals;
and move beyond a focus on ‘‘filling boxes on an organization chart’’ to
‘‘meeting work requirements through innovative means.’’ 15
Problem 6: Too Much Paperwork
Top managers in most organizations have a low tolerance for paperwork. A
colleague of mine jokes that ‘‘top managers in my organization won’t respond
to a one-page survey or read beyond the first page of a memo.’’ One reason
for this is that top managers are often overburdened with paperwork, since
they receive it from so many quarters. Technology, which was once seen as a
blessed solution to information overload, now appears to be a major cause of
it—as stressed-out managers cope with burgeoning messages by electronic
mail, cell phones, faxes, and other sources.
Hence, one problem with the traditional approach to succession planning
is that it may require substantial paperwork to:
▲ Assess present work requirements or competencies.
▲ Appraise current individual performance.
▲ Assess future work requirements or competencies.
▲ Assess individual potential for advancement.
▲ Prepare replacement charts.
▲ Identify future career paths or career maps.
▲ Identify key positions requiring replacements.
▲ Establish individual development plans (IDPs) to help individuals narrow
the gap between their present work requirements/performance and
future work requirements/potential.
▲ Follow up on IDPs.
While full-time specialists or part-time HR generalists can provide assistance
in recordkeeping, they can seldom supply the details for every person,
position, and requirement in the organization. Perhaps the best approach is
to minimize the amount of paperwork, but that is difficult to do. Whenever
possible, however, succession planning coordinators, management development
professionals, or human resource professionals should supply information
that is readily available from sources other than the immediate
organizational superiors of employees participating in succession planning ef-

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
75
forts. That way, the superiors can focus their attention on identifying the talent
to implement business strategy, identifying critical positions and high-potential
talent, and formulating and following through on developmental planning.
Problem 7: Too Many Meetings
Just as the traditional approach to succession planning can create resistance
owing to the massive paperwork it can generate, so too can it lead to resistance
because it can require numerous and time-consuming meetings. For instance,
to carry out SP&M, management employees may need to participate in the
following:
▲ Kickoff Meetings. If an annual SP&M procedure is in place, management
employees may be required to attend kickoff meetings, conducted by the CEO,
that are intended to reinforce the importance of the effort.
▲ Organizational, Divisional, Functional, or Other Meetings. These
meetings may focus on SP&M for each job category, organizational level, function,
or location.
▲ Work Requirements Meetings. If the organization makes it a policy to
base succession on identifiable work requirements, competencies, success factors,
or other ‘‘objective criteria,’’ then management employees will usually be
involved in meetings to identify these criteria.
▲ Employee Performance Appraisal Meetings. In most organizations,
management employees appraise the performance of their immediate subordinates
as a part of the SP&M program.
▲ Career Path Meetings. If the organization attempts to identify predictable,
desirable, or historical relationships between jobs, then management employees
may be asked to participate in that effort by attending meetings or
training.
▲ Career Planning Meetings. If the organization makes an effort to discover
individual career goals and interests as a means to do a ‘‘reality check’’
on possible successors, then management employees may have to take time to
meet with each employee covered in the succession plan.
▲ Potential Assessment Meetings. Assessing individual potential is futureoriented
and may require meetings different from those required for performance
appraisal.
▲ Development Meetings. Planning for individual development, as a
means of narrowing the gap between what individuals know or do presently
and what they must know or do to qualify for advancement, may require timeconsuming
individual meetings.
▲ Training, Education, and Developmental Meetings. As one means by
which succession plans may be realized, meetings centered on training, education,
and development may demand considerable time.

76 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
While meetings can be consolidated to save some time, each meeting listed
above serves an important purpose. Attending meetings can require a significant
time commitment from employees at all levels.
Integrating Whole Systems Transformational Change and
Appreciative Inquiry into Succession: What Are These
Topics, and What Added Value Do They Bring?
Since the publication of the second edition of this book, much excitement has
been centered on two (relatively new) developments in change management.
One is called whole systems transformational change (WSTC), the other is
called appreciative inquiry. Both can have a bearing on SP&M programs and
are therefore deserving of attention.
What Is Whole Systems Transformational Change, and How Can It
Have a Bearing on SP&M?
Whole systems transformational change (WSTC) is ‘‘an adaptable and customtailored
wisdom-creating learning experience that often results in a paradigm
shift.’’ 16 It usually involves bringing together the key decision-makers of an
organization for an intense event, usually lasting several days but planned for
in advance. It is an approach that involves everyone and leads to change at the
speed needed in modern business. Think of a problem-solving session that
may involve hundreds or even thousands of people, all focused on solving the
same or related problems, and you have the idea.
How can WSTC have a bearing on SP&M? The answer is that, quite often,
the installation of an SP&M program requires many people to be involved.
Additionally, the human resources system may be missing many key elements
to support an intervention as robust as the introduction of an SP&M intervention.
For example, there may be no competency models, no 360-degree capability,
no individual learning plans, and no technology to support the SP&M
program. Creating these takes time and can lead to a loss of faith in the SP&M
program from executives or others. Worst yet, executives and other senior
leaders in the organization may not share the same goals or vision for the
SP&M program. Under normal circumstances, there are no easy ways to solve
these problems. But a WSTC brings the key stakeholders together, facilitating
a process whereby they ‘‘thrash out’’ the key decisions, build key support systems,
and communicate among themselves to achieve some comparability in
goals.
The WSTC is, in short, a possible tool—though it is also a philosophy—for
bringing about the rapid but large-scale change needed to support a SP&M
intervention.

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
77
What Is Appreciative Inquiry, and How Can It Have a Bearing
on SP&M?
Is a glass half empty, or is it half full? That simple question actually has profound
implications. It speaks to the difference between a problem-centered
orientation to the world and a strength-leveraging orientation. Most managers
are problem-oriented. They do not believe in fixing what is not broken. Hence,
they tend to focus on the negative—what is wrong, what the problems are,
and (with people) what their deficiencies or gaps are. But the problem with
always focusing on the negative is that it shuts people down and depresses or
demotivates them.
Appreciative inquiry (AI), however, requires a paradigm shift. It takes its
name quite literally from asking about (that is, inquiring) what is going well
(that is, appreciation).
Hence, the phrase appreciative inquiry literally means ‘‘asking questions
about things worth appreciating.’’ Appreciative inquiry thus focuses on what
is going right, what the strengths are, and (with people) what their unique
talents or abilities are. 17
How can this idea be applied to SP&M? There are many answers to that
simple question, and the space here is insufficient to treat them all. Suffice it
to say that, instead of focusing on what deficiencies or gaps people possess, AI
indicates that a better approach is to identify individuals’ strengths and talents,
and then capitalize or build on those strengths. One goal is to energize people
with positive feelings about what they can achieve, what they do well, and
what is good about them. Another goal is to encourage people to discover and
capitalize on their strengths and talents.
While there are many potential applications of AI to SP&M, I will point to
just one. In conducting a 360-degree assessment, an organization will typically
collect scores on individuals and then schedule a session to discuss in what
competencies that individual is deficient. A goal is to pinpoint developmental
gaps and then discuss ways to fill them by using developmental experiences,
such as training or coaching.
But when AI is used, the tenor of the feedback session for 360-degree
assessment shifts from what is wrong with the person to what is uniquely right
about the person. Attention is devoted to discussing what others perceive to
be that person’s unique strengths, talents, and abilities. The individual is encouraged
to mentor others in areas where he or she is strong. The individual
is also encouraged to think about how he or she could better leverage the
strengths that he or she possesses. The difference in results can be profound.
Instead of walking out of the room depressed, an individual may walk out
energized and excited.
AI has many potential applications to SP&M. 18 We have only scratched the
surface. But it is worth thinking about how AI may mean new, fresh, and positive
approaches to developing people. Think about that as you read the rest of
this book.

78 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Requirements for a Fifth-Generation Approach
Minimum requirements for a fifth-generation approach to SP&M include the
following:
▲ A Policy and Procedure Statement, in Writing, to Govern SP&M
▲ A Statement of Values Governing the Effort (which may be included in
the policy and procedure statement)
▲ Competency Models for the Groups Targeted
▲ Full-Circle, Multirater Assessment Efforts (or other ways to assess individual
potential)
▲ Individual Development Plans
▲ Skill Inventories for Talent Pools Inside and Outside the Organization
Of course, it goes without saying that senior management involvement and
support are essential requirements—as are, particularly, the personal commitment
and participation of the CEO.
Key Steps in a Fifth-Generation Approach
How should systematic SP&M be carried out in organizational settings? While
the answer to this question may vary by national culture, organizational culture,
and top management values, one way is to follow a ‘‘seven-pointed star
model for systematic succession planning and management.’’ That model is
illustrated in Exhibit 3-6. The steps in the model, summarized below, provide
the foundation for this book—and the foundation for many best-practice
SP&M programs in many organizations.
Step 1: Make the Commitment
As a first step, the organization’s decision-makers should commit to systematic
SP&M and establish an SP&M program. To some extent, this represents a ‘‘leap
of faith’’ in the value of planned over unplanned approaches to SP&M. In this
step the organization’s decision-makers should:
▲ Assess current problems and practices.
▲ Assess and demonstrate the need for the program.
▲ Determine the organization’s exact SP&M program requirements.
▲ Link the SP&M program directly to organizational and human resource
strategic plans.
▲ Benchmark SP&M practices in other organizations.
▲ Clarify the roles of different groups in the program.
▲ Formulate a program mission statement.

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
79
Exhibit 3-6. The Seven-Pointed Star Model for Systematic Succession
Planning and Management
Step 1:
Make the
Commitment
Step 7:
Evaluate the Succession
Planning Program
Step 2:
Assess Present Work/People
Requirements
Step 6:
Close the
Developmental Gap
Step 3:
Appraise Individual
Performace
Step 5:
Assess Future
Individual Potential
Step 4:
Assess Future Work/People
Requirements
▲ Write a policy and procedures to guide the program.
▲ Identify target groups to be served by the program.
▲ Establish program priorities.
▲ Prepare an action plan to guide the program.
▲ Communicate the action plan.
▲ Conduct SP&M meetings as necessary to unveil the program and review
progress continually.
▲ Train those involved in the program as necessary.
▲ Counsel managers about SP&M problems in their areas of responsibility.

80 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Step 2: Assess Present Work/People Requirements
As a second step, decision-makers should assess the present work requirements
in key positions. Only in that way can individuals be prepared for advancement
in a way that is solidly grounded on work requirements. In this
step, decision-makers should clarify where key leadership positions exist in
the organization and should apply one or more approaches to determining
work or competency requirements.
Step 3: Appraise Individual Performance
How well are individuals presently performing their jobs? The answer to this
question is critical because most SP&M programs assume that individuals must
be performing well in their present jobs in order to qualify for advancement.
As part of this step, the organization should also begin establishing an inventory
of talent so that it is clear what human assets are already available.
Step 4: Assess Future Work/People Requirements
What will be the work or competency requirements in key leadership positions
in the future? To answer this question, decision-makers should make an effort
to assess future work requirements and competencies. In that way, future leaders
may be prepared to cope with changing requirements and organizational
strategic objectives.
Step 5: Assess Future Individual Potential
How well are individuals prepared for advancement? What talents do they possess,
and how well do those talents match up to future work requirements? To
answer these questions, the organization should establish a process to assess
future individual potential. That future-oriented process should not be confused
with past- or present-oriented employee performance appraisal.
Step 6: Close the Developmental Gap
How can the organization meet SP&M needs by developing people internally
or using other means to meet succession needs? To answer this question, the
organization should establish a continuing program for leadership development
to cultivate future leaders internally. Decision-makers should also explore
alternatives to traditional promotion-from-within methods of meeting
succession needs.

Moving to a State-of-the-Art Approach
81
Step 7: Evaluate the Succession Planning Program
To improve, the SP&M program must be subjected to continual evaluation to
assess how well it is working. That is the seventh and final step of the model.
The results of evaluation should, in turn, be used to make continuous program
improvements and to maintain a commitment to systematic SP&M.
Summary
This chapter listed the characteristics that are found in exemplary succession
planning and management programs. It then summarized typical problems
afflicting succession planning and management programs, and suggested possible
solutions to them. It also presented a seven-pointed star model for systematic
succession planning and management.

C H A P T E R 4
COMPETENCY IDENTIFICATION AND
VALUES CLARIFICATION: KEYS TO
SUCCESSION PLANNING AND
MANAGEMENT
Competency identification and values clarification are increasingly important
foundations for an effective succession planning and management (SP&M)
program. But what are competencies? How are competencies used in SP&M?
How are competencies identified and used to guide SP&M efforts? What are
values, and what is values clarification? How are values used in SP&M? How
are values clarification studies conducted and used for SP&M? This chapter
answers these questions.
What Are Competencies?
The word competence was first linked to a human trait in 1959. 1 Using that
work as a starting point, David McClelland focused attention on competencies
in 1973. 2 McClelland noticed that standardized intelligence tests were not
good predictors of job success, and he wondered why. Competencies as understood
today stemmed from his initial questioning about why standardized
intelligence tests did not predict job success. Other authors and researchers,
of course, contributed to the development of competency identification, modeling,
and assessment as known and practiced today. 3
Although the term job competency has different meanings, it can be understood
to mean ‘‘an underlying characteristic of an employee (i.e., motive, trait,
skill, aspects of one’s self-image, social role, or a body of knowledge) that
results in effective and/or superior performance in a job.’’ 4 Competency identification
is the process of discovering job competencies. 5 A competency model
is the result of competency identification. 6 Competency assessment is the process
of comparing an individual to an existing competency model, 7 and that can
be done by many means—including full-circle, multirater assessment.
Organizations have made extensive use of competency models in recent
82

Competency Identification and Values Clarification
83
years, which have been widely accepted. 8 One reason is that competency models
can help to clarify differences between outstanding (exemplary) and average
performers—an increasingly important issue in a fiercely competitive
global business environment. A second reason is that competency models are
superior to work-based approaches, which rely on descriptions of work activities
only, in pinpointing what people need to be successful. Increasingly,
knowledge is only part of what is needed to be a successful performer. Also
needed are appropriate attitudes and motivation, which are not well examined
in traditional job descriptions or traditional performance appraisals.
How Are Competencies Used in Succession Planning and
Management?
Competency models are essential building blocks on which to base an SP&M
effort. Without them, it is difficult to:
▲ Link and align the organization’s core competencies (strategic strengths)
to job competencies.
▲ Define high-potentials or other broad categories of employees.
▲ Clarify exactly what present and future competencies are essential to
success in the organization and in its various departments, jobs, or occupations.
▲ Provide a basis for performance management by creating a work environment
that encourages high performance among all workers.
▲ Establish clear work expectations for the present and future.
▲ Create full-circle, multirater assessments that are tailor-made to the
unique requirements of one corporate culture.
▲ Devise competency menus that describe how individuals might be developed
for the future.
▲ Formulate individual development plans (IDPs) to help individuals narrow
the developmental gap between what competencies they need to
be successful (as described by the competency model) and what competencies
they presently possess (as identified by a full-circle, multirater
assessment or other approaches to examining current performance or
future potential).
Conducting Competency Identification Studies
Competency studies may have different goals. The goals must be clear before
the resulting studies will be useful. Those who set out to conduct competency
studies should be clear what they are trying to do, why they are doing it, and
what their stakeholders (such as the CEO) are seeking. Elaborate studies do

84 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
little good if nobody knows what they are for, nobody really wanted them, or
nobody knows how to use them.
A present competency study, to define the term, focuses on one department,
job category, or occupational group. In conducting a competency study
of this kind, it is usually important to create two distinct groups—exemplary
performers and average performers—for the department or other unit studied.
The goal is usually to discover the difference between the highest performers
in the group and the average performers in that same group. When
completed, the present competency study clarifies what are the essential competencies
for success at present.
A future competency study also focuses on one department, job category,
or occupational group. But in conducting a competency study of this kind, it
is usually important to start by describing the organization’s strategic goals
and objectives. What results will the organization seek in the future? Why will
those results be sought? What competencies are necessary to realize those results?
A different approach is needed from that in a present competency study.
Often, there may be nobody in the organization who is an exemplary performer
when compared to future requirements. It may thus be necessary to do
scenario planning to discover the competencies needed in a future business
environment. That also requires a level of sophistication that few internal practitioners
possess—or have time to use if they do.
A derailment competency study, to define the term, focuses on the characteristics
linked to failure—or to falling off the fast track—for those in one department,
job category, or occupational group. In conducting a derailment
study, it is usually important to identify individuals who have failed assignments,
dropped off the high-potential list, experienced career plateauing, or
otherwise become ineligible for a list of successors or high potentials. The goal
is to determine why people who were once considered high potentials fell off
the track or reached a career plateau. Once that is known, of course, strategies
can be formulated to help them develop and surmount their failures—and
help others avoid similar problems. Causes of derailment might include,
among others, problems with morals (such as sexual indiscretions) or problems
with health-related issues (such as alcoholism or drug-related ailments).
Different approaches to competency identification have been devised. 8
While space is not available here to review each approach to competency identification,
those who are serious about SP&M will search out information about
available approaches. They will select an approach that is compatible with the
organization’s corporate culture, since introducing competency modeling to
an organization that has not used it before is really a change effort in its own
right.
Competency modeling offers a newer way to identify characteristics linked
to exemplary job performance than traditional job analysis. An advantage of
competency modeling is its rigor. Another is its ability to capture the (otherwise
ineffable) characteristics of successful job performers and job perform-

Competency Identification and Values Clarification
85
ance. It can provide valuable information on key positions and high-potential
employees on which to base SP&M practices.
Unfortunately, competency modeling does have disadvantages. One is that
the term’s meaning can be confusing. Another, more serious, disadvantage is
that rigorous approaches to competency modeling usually require considerable
time, money, and expertise to carry out successfully. Rarely can they be
done internally except by the largest organizations. These can be genuine
drawbacks when the pressure is on to take action—and achieve results—
quickly.
Using Competency Models
Competency models have emerged as a foundation for state-of-the-art SP&M
programs. Lacking them, organizations will rarely be able to proceed beyond a
simple replacement approach to SP&M. They provide a blueprint for building
competence needed at present or in the future, and they provide a norm or
criterion against which to measure individual development requirements.
They are especially important when an organization commits to developing
talent pools, since they provide a standard against which all individuals may
be assessed.
New Developments in Competency Identification,
Modeling, and Assessment
What’s new in competency identification, modeling, and assessment? One new
development is that competency modeling seems to have caught on. Businesses
in the United States are estimated to be spending about $100 million
per year in identifying competency models for their organizations. 9 And yet
much work remains to be done. Not all competency modeling efforts are effective.
One reason is that HR professionals and operating managers alike are not
properly trained in, or do not understand, what competency models are for
and how they relate to organizational requirements.
Another new development is that differences in thinking, and philosophical
views, about competency modeling are becoming more pronounced. A key
question to consider is, ‘‘What does the competency model focus on?’’ It is, of
course, possible to study derailers—that is, what leads to failure. It is also
possible (and many organizations do this) to focus on what is required to
qualify for each level of the corporate hierarchy. But perhaps most important,
it is possible to focus on what measurable productivity differences may exist
between the most productive performers in a job category and those who are
fully trained but are not the most productive (called fully successful performers).
The real value added is in discovering what differences exist between
exemplary and fully successful performers and then integrating hiring, succes-

86 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
sion planning and management, and career-development efforts to create
more exemplary performers in the organization. 10 The goal is to leverage up
the competitive advantage of the organization by gaining the productivity advantages
yielded by more high performers, pound for pound, than other organizations
in the same industry may have. Another issue is what to focus on.
Should the goal be to meet deficiencies or to leverage individual strengths?
A third new development is that many technology packages are now available
to support competency identification and modeling efforts. They often
come packaged as part of larger HR information systems (HRISs) or human
capital management (HCM) suites and should be sought using those keywords.
They may also appear in learning management systems (LMSs).
Unfortunately, some practitioners think that the competency software will
do their thinking for them, which is (of course) not the case. Effective competency
identification, assessment, and modeling are hard work. 11 Technology is
no shortcut—and sometimes has the tendency to cause a short circuit—to
effective practice.
Identifying and Using Generic and Culture-Specific
Competency Development Strategies to Build Bench
Strength
How is it possible to ‘‘build’’ competencies? The answer is to use competency
development strategies. Competency development strategies are methods by
which individuals can improve their competencies. Competency development
strategies close gaps between what should be (as described in a competency
model) and what is (as measured by approaches such as 360-degree assessments
and assessment centers). Examples of competency development strategies
may include the following:
▲ Attending a Classroom Training Course
▲ Participating in Online Training
▲ Reading a Book
▲ Reading an Article
▲ Listening to an Audiotape
▲ Watching a Videotape
These are just examples, and many other approaches are possible. Of course,
to be successful, the developmental strategy must be focused on the competency.
Hence, if the competency to be developed is ‘‘budgeting skill,’’ then the
developmental strategy should be focused on that topic.
Competency development strategies may be divided into two categories:
(1) generic and (2) corporate culture-specific. A generic competency development
strategy is necessarily general. To build budgeting skill, then, any book

Competency Identification and Values Clarification
87
on the topic will do. Any training program on budgeting will do. No effort is
made to tie the development strategy to the unique conditions prevailing in
the corporate culture.
A corporate culture-specific development strategy, on the other hand, is
specific to the organization. To build budgeting skill, an individual might do
the following:
▲ Watch (shadow) someone in the organization who is especially good at
budgeting.
▲ Perform budgeting with someone in the company.
▲ Interview someone experienced in the company about what is necessary
for an acceptable or even exemplary budget.
Many resources exist to identify generic development strategies. 12 Those
can be purchased from outside vendors, found in books, or uncovered on the
Web. All that is needed is to identify appropriate but general material linked
to every competency in a competency model. Corporate culture-specific development
strategies require investigation. One way to identify them is to identify
exemplary performers—individuals who are particularly good at demonstrating
a competency. Then interview them. For example, ask them:
▲ Who in this organization would you advise people to talk to if they want
to build this competency?
▲ What kind of work activities or assignments should individuals be given
if they are to build this competency in this organization?
▲ Where should people go to find centers of excellence for this competency
in this organization?
▲ How would you advise someone in this company who wants to build
this competency to go about learning how it is done here?
Use the interview guide provided in Exhibit 4-1 for this purpose. Then feed
back the interview results to exemplary performers, verify that the assignments
would actually build the targeted competencies in the company, and put them
online so that individuals may access them as they prepare their individual
development plans.
What Are Values, and What Is Values Clarification?
Simply stated, values are beliefs about what is good or bad. Values clarification
is the process of making clear what values take priority over others, what
is more important than other things. While competencies clarify differences
between individual performers, values add an ethical dimension. They de-

88 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
Exhibit 4-1. An Interview Guide to Collect Corporate-Culture-Specific
Competency Development Strategies
Directions: Use this interview guide to collect information about how to build competencies
in the context of your organization’s unique corporate culture. Select several
exemplary performers who have been identified as especially good (exemplary)
at demonstrating a given competency. Indicate that competency next to the label
‘‘competency’’ below. Then spend about 15 minutes to interview each exemplary
performer using the questions appearing below. When you are finished, analyze the
results by identifying common themes or patterns across all the interview results.
Competency:
Name
Years of Experience in Job
Title
Date
Interviewed by:
1. Think of a time when you were asked to demonstrate this competency.
What was the situation?
When did this situation occur?
What did you do?
How do you believe the experience helped you demonstrate this competency?
If your mentee participated in an experience like this, would it help to build the
competency?
2. Who are some people in the organization who are exceptionally good at demonstrating
this competency to whom you could refer your mentee?
3. What are some work experiences in the organization that you believe your
mentee should be given to build or demonstrate the competency?
4. How might the pressure to produce by specific deadlines help to build or demonstrate
the competency?
5. Where would you send people—that is, what geographical locations—to build
and /or demonstrate this competency? (Where are the centers of excellence for
this competency in the organization, and why do you think so?)

Competency Identification and Values Clarification
89
6. List special and specific work assignments that would be particularly useful in
building or demonstrating this competency.
7. If someone asked you for advice on how to build this competency in this organization,
what advice would you give them?
8. Could you think of some upcoming or pending company projects that might be
especially useful to build this competency? What would they be, and why do you
think they could help to build the competency?
scribe ethical expectations for those who live and work in one corporate culture.
Values have commanded increasing interest in organizational settings.
Consider the following: At a recent annual meeting of Eli Lilly and Company,
Chairman and CEO Randall Tobias extended the meeting by over two hours to
discuss the core values of the company and their importance to the future of
the organization. 13 Similarly, in a recent interview in Organizational Dynamics,
Herb Kelleher, Chairman and CEO of Southwest Airlines, discussed the
central role that values play in that organization. 14 Fortune magazine reported
that over 50 percent of U.S. corporations have a values statement—more than
double that of a decade ago. 15
How Are Values Used in Succession Planning and
Management?
Values statements and values clarification, like competency models, are essential
building blocks on which to base a succession planning and management
effort. Without them, it is difficult to add an ethical dimension to the development
of people in various departments, job categories, or occupations. Much
like competency models, they help to do the following:
▲ Link and align the organization’s core values to group and individual
values.
▲ Define high potentials or other broad categories of employees.
▲ Clarify exactly what present and future values are essential to success in
the organization and in its various departments, jobs, or occupations.
▲ Provide a basis for performance management by creating a work environment
that encourages value-based performance.
▲ Establish the values underlying work expectations for the present and
future.
▲ Create full-circle, multirater assessments that are tailor-made to the
unique requirements of one corporate culture.

90 B ACKGROUND I NFORMATION A BOUT S UCCESSION PLANNING AND M ANAGEMENT
▲ Provide another basis to formulate individual development plans (IDPs)
to help individuals develop themselves to meet present and future challenges.
Conducting Values Clarification Studies
Many tools and techniques are available to help organizations clarify their values.
Some organizations undertake values clarification through small group
activities. 16 Others use unique approaches, such as teaching championship automobile
racing. 17 At least two other approaches may be used. One is simple;
the other is more complicated—but may be more meaningful.
A Simple Approach: Top Management Values Clarification
A simple way to clarify the values of the organization is to ask top managers
what values are most important. To use this approach, provide a brief introduction
to what values are, why they are important, and how they are used.
Then ask senior executives—either in a meeting or online—to describe what
they believe to be the most important values for the organization at present
and in the future. When that list has been gathered from individuals, feed it
back to them, allow them to discuss the list, and ask them to vote on the most
important. When they finish this activity, ask them to define each value and
state its importance to the organization and to individuals.
A More Complicated Approach: Values Clarification from Top
Performers
A more complicated approach to carrying out values clarification is to ask top
performers or high potentials in the organization to describe their values. That
can be done through behavioral event interviewing—a rigorous method used
in competency modeling in which individuals are asked to describe the most
difficult ethical situation they have ever faced in their jobs and describe what
they were thinking, feeling, and doing at each step as they faced that situation.
The values statements should appear as part of their discussion. (If they do
not, then the interviewer should be sure to ask probing questions to elicit
comments about the values in which the high potentials believe.) The values
identified by individual high potentials can then be summarized. What is important
is not what one person says but rather what similar thematic patterns
surface from many respondents.
Once the values have been identified, they can be fed back to high potentials
in focus groups for further discussion and refinement. When that process
is completed, the value statements can be given to top managers for approval

Competency Identification and Values Clarification
91
or modification. In this way, the values clarified for the organization match the
work-related beliefs of the best performers and are validated by top managers.
Using Values Clarification
Values clarification provides an additional, and increasingly important, dimension
to SP&M. Without it, individuals may be equipped with sound competencies
but may lack the ethical dimension that is so important to leadership in
the future. Values can also be integrated with competency models so that it is
possible to create a success profile or description of leadership requirements
essential at all organizational levels, departments, job categories, or occupations
in the future. Alternatively, it is possible to prepare values lists and assessment
instruments against which to compare individuals. 18 In other words, it
is possible to use values as a driving force for building high potentials and
competence in organizations. Like competencies, then, values can be the glue
that holds together all key aspects of a SP&M program.
Bringing It All Together: Competencies and Values
Organizations today need both competencies and values. It is just not enough
to make people good performers. They must be ethical as well and possess a
moral dimension that is consistent with the image the organization wishes to
purvey. Lacking values, high potentials cannot be successful in the long term
and cannot bring credit to the organization.
Summary
As this chapter emphasized, competencies and values are increasingly important
foundations for an effective succession planning and management program.
The chapter defined competencies and explained how they are used in
succession planning and management, then defined values and explained how
values can be used in succession planning and management. A major point of
the chapter was that, without competencies and values, creating a state-of-theart
succession planning and management program will be difficult because
they provide the blueprints for the talent to be created.
The next chapter describes how to lay the foundation for a succession
planning and management program by taking subsequent steps in planning
and implementing a program that will be successful in one organizational setting
or corporate culture.

This page intentionally left blank

PART
II
LAYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A SUCCESSION
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Part I
Background Information About
Succession Planning and Management
Part IV
Part II
Closing the “Developmental Gap”: Laying the Foundation for a
Operating and Evaluating a Succession Succession Planning and
Planning and Management Program
Management Program
Part III
Assessing the Present and the Future
•Assessing current problems and practices
•Demonstrating the need for SP&M
•Determining organizational requirements
•Linking SP&M activities to organizational strategy and human
resource strategy
•Benchmarking SP&M practices in other organizations
•Obtaining and building management commitment to systematic
SP&M
•Clarifying program roles
•Formulating a mission statement
•Writing policy and procedures
•Identifying target groups
•Setting program priorities
•Addressing the legal framework in SP&M
•Establishing strategies for rolling out an SP&M program
•Preparing a program action plan
•Communicating the action plan
•Conducting SP&M meetings
•Training on SP&M
•Counseling managers about succession planning problems
in their areas

This page intentionally left blank

C H A P T E R 5
MAKING THE CASE FOR
MAJOR CHANGE
For many years, introducing and consolidating change has been a centerpiece
of debate among managers and writers about management. Many believe that
the essence of management’s job is to be instruments for progressive change—
or, at least, to create an environment suitable for change.
Establishing a systematic succession planning and management (SP&M)
program in an organization that never had one is a major change effort. It
requires a quantum leap from the status quo, what some call a ‘‘transformational
change.’’ Success depends on demonstrating, at the outset, a need for
change. The only exception is the rare case in which decision-makers have
already reached a consensus to depart radically from past practice.
To make the case for change in SP&M it will usually be necessary to:
▲ Assess current problems and practices.
▲ Demonstrate the need.
▲ Determine organizational requirements.
▲ Link SP&M to the strategic plan and human resource plan.
▲ Benchmark SP&M processes in other organizations.
▲ Obtain and build management commitment to systematic SP&M.
These issues are the focus of this chapter. They may seem to be monumental
issues—and sometimes they are—but addressing them is essential to lay a
solid foundation on which to build a systematic SP&M program.
Assessing Current Problems and Practices
Information about current problems and practices is needed before it is possible
to build a convincing case for change. Planning for the future requires
information about the past and present.
95

96 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Assessing Current Problems
Crisis is a common impetus for change. As problems arise and are noticed,
people naturally search for solutions. As the magnitude and severity of the
problems increase, the search for a solution intensifies.
The same principles apply to SP&M. If the organization has experienced no
crises in finding qualified successors, retaining talented people, maintaining
leadership continuity, or facilitating individual advancement, then few decision-makers
will feel an urgent need to direct attention to these issues. On the
other hand, SP&M is likely to attract increasing attention when problems like
these surface:
▲ Key positions are filled only after long delays.
▲ Key positions can be filled only by hiring from outside.
▲ Key positions have few people ‘‘ready now’’ to assume them (that is
called weak bench strength).
▲ Vacancies in key positions cannot be filled with confidence.
▲ Key positions are subject to frequent or unexpected turnover.
▲ Replacements for key positions are frequently unsuccessful in performing
their new duties.
▲ High performers or high-potential employees are leaving the organization
in droves.
▲ Individuals routinely leave the organization to advance professionally
or to achieve their career goals.
▲ Decision-makers complain about weak bench strength.
▲ Employees complain that decisions about whom to advance are not
based on who is best qualified but rather on caprice, nepotism, and
personal favoritism.
▲ Employees and decision-makers complain that decisions about whom
to promote into key positions are adversely affected by discrimination
or by expediency.
To build a case for a systematic approach to SP&M, ask decision-makers if
they face the problems listed above. Additionally, focus attention on identifying
the most important problems the organization is facing and review how
those problems are influenced by existing SP&M practices. If possible, document
actual succession problems that have been experienced in the past—
including ‘‘horror stories’’ (anecdotes about major problem situations) or
‘‘war stories’’ (anecdotes about negative experiences), if possible. Although
anecdotes do not necessarily provide an accurate indication of existing conditions,
they can be powerfully persuasive and can help convince skeptical decision-makers
that a problem warrants investigation. Use them to focus attention
on the organization’s present SP&M practices—and, when appropriate, the

Making the Case for Major Change
97
need to change them from informal to systematic. Also, consider using approaches
to identify and overcome objections to a SP&M program. (See Exhibit
5-1.)
In my 2004 survey, I asked the respondents to indicate whether SP&M had
become more important to their organizations over the last few years. Their
answers are revealing, indicating that many current problems have emerged
that necessitate increased attention to SP&M. (See Exhibit 5-2.)
Exhibit 5-1. Strategies for Handling Resistance to Implementing Succession
Planning and Management
Possible Cause of Resistance
Managers or employees resist a
SP&M program because they
believe it will:
Possible Strategies for Handling the Cause
Mean that they have to give up Consider establishing a council to advise on
something (such as a say in who matters related to the program.
is promoted). Emphasize that organizational superiors of
all individuals can and will be involved in
making decisions.
Require work for no reason Start by describing how and why other orga-
(they see no need for it).
nizations have used succession planning.
Show reasons for the program that go beyond
mere replacement planning and include
individual development.
Do more harm than good. Try to find out why managers and employees
feel this way and ask for their advice about
how to prevent abuses of the program.
Be managed by people who are Hire an external consultant to establish the
not trustworthy or managed in a framework for the program and isolate the
way that is not ethical.
nature of the possible concerns.
Require too much time, effort, Explain what information is required to
or resources.
make SP&M useful and then seek the advice
of those who resist the program on this basis
by asking for their suggestions about the
best ways to get that information.
Double-check to determine whether you are
recommending that the program be installed
too quickly rather than gradually implemented.

98 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 5-2. The Importance of Succession Planning and Management
Question: Has succession planning become more important to your organization
over the last few years? If yes, briefly tell why; if no, briefly tell why.
All respondents answered yes, and provided the following reasons:
Leadership is the key to a healthy business in a ‘‘down’’ business environment.
It has been added to the President’s Management Agenda.
Board of directors requirements. It is now a corporate governance issue. Investors
look for it.
Because up to 1
/3 of our employees will be eligible to retire within the next few
years.
The marketplace has changed and succession planning allows us to continue to
grow.
Turnover among execs participating in succession plans due to minimal executive
openings.
A large number of organizational employees are ready for retirement in five years.
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).
Assessing Current Practices
In large organizations using an informal approach to SP&M, nobody is aware
of the methods being used within the organization. Nor should they be. After
all, in those settings SP&M is handled idiosyncratically—or not at all—by each
manager. As a consequence, nobody is aware of the organization’s existing
practices.
A good place to start, then, is to find out what practices are currently being
used in the organization. Exemplary, albeit isolated, approaches may already
be in use, and they may serve as excellent starting points on which to begin a
systematic approach. They enjoy the advantage of a track record because they
have already been tried out in the organization and probably have one or more
managers who support them.
To emphasize this point, I am aware of one Fortune 500 corporation that
uses an informal approach: Managers establish their own SP&M approaches as
they feel they are warranted, and those activities vary dramatically. Most managers
make no effort to conduct SP&M. As vacancies occur, replacements are
frantically sought. Filling key positions is a crisis-oriented activity. (That is
often true in organizations without systematic SP&M programs, as my 2004
survey revealed; see Exhibit 5-3.)
But even in this organization, one major operating division has established

Making the Case for Major Change
99
Exhibit 5-3. Making Decisions About Successors (in Organizations Without
Systematic Succession Planning and Management)
Question: How are decisions made about successors for positions in your organization?
Circle all appropriate response codes below.
Percentage
Response
We usually wait until positions are vacant and then scurry around
madly to find successors. 21%
We ‘‘secretly’’ prepare successors. 32%
Whenever a position opens up, we rely on expediency to identify
someone to fill it, hoping for the best. 37%
Other Methods 11%
Total 100%
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).
a practice of circulating a confidential memo each year to department managers
to request their nominations for their own replacements. No attempt is
made to verify that the candidates possess the requisite knowledge and skills
suitable for advancement; no attempt is made to verify that the candidates are
willing to accept new assignments; and no attempt is made to ensure their
availability, if needed, or to prepare them for advancement. However, the practice
of circulating a memo is an excellent place to start a systematic approach
to SP&M. It can be a focal point to direct attention to the issue—and to the
need to adopt a systematic approach.
Use three approaches to assess the current status of SP&M in the organization:
(1) talk to others informally; (2) send out an electronic mail question; or
(3) conduct a written survey.
Talk to Others Informally
Ask key decision-makers how they are handling SP&M practices. Begin by talking
to the chairman or chief executive officer, if possible, because that person
is likely to be more aware of the processes than others. Then discuss the matter
with other top managers. Pose questions such as the following:
▲ How is the organization presently handling SP&M? What is being done
at the highest levels? At the lower levels? In different divisions? In different
locales?

100 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
▲ In your opinion, what should the organization be doing about
SP&M—and why do you believe so?
▲ What predictable losses of key personnel are anticipated in your area of
responsibility? For example, how many pending retirements are you
aware of? Will pending promotions lead to a domino effect in which a
vacancy in one key position, filled by promotion from within, will set
off a chain reaction that leads to a series of vacancies in many other
positions?
▲ What people or positions are absolutely critical to the continued successful
operation of your division, function, department, or location?
How would you handle the sudden and unexpected loss of a key person?
Several key people?
▲ Have you experienced the loss of a key person in the last year or two?
How did you handle it? If you had to do it again, would you handle it
the same way? If so, why? If not, why not?
▲ What regular efforts, if any, do you make to identify possible replacements
for key people or positions in your part of the organization? (For
example, do you discuss this issue as part of management performance
appraisals, during business planning activities, or in other ways?)
▲ What efforts, if any, do you make to identify individuals with the potential
to advance beyond their current positions?
▲ How do you prepare individuals to advance when you perceive they
have potential? What systematic efforts are made to train, educate, or
develop them for future positions?
▲ What strongly held beliefs do you have about SP&M? For instance, do
you believe the organization should inform possible successors of their
status (and thereby risk creating a crown prince problem) or conceal
that information (and risk losing high-potential employees who are
tapped for better advancement prospects elsewhere, perhaps by other
organizations or even by competitors)? How do you believe the organization
should handle plateaued workers, who will advance no further,
and blocked workers, who are unable to advance beyond their current
positions because they are blocked by plateaued workers above them?
When you finish interviewing decision-makers, prepare a summary of the
results about SP&M practices in the organization. Cite individual names only
if given explicit permission to do so. Include a summary of current information
on effective SP&M practices obtained externally—from sources such as this
book—and then ask if more attention can be devoted to the topic. The reactions
you receive should provide valuable clues to how much interest and
support exists among key decision-makers to explore a systematic approach to
SP&M.

Making the Case for Major Change
101
Send Out an Electronic Mail Question
A top manager in a large corporation focused attention on systematic SP&M
merely by sending out an e-mail message to his peers. He posed this question:
‘‘Assume that you lost a key department manager on short notice through
death or disability. (You can choose any department you wish.) Who is ‘‘ready’’
to assume that position? Name anyone.’’
That question provoked a flurry of responses. By merely posing this question,
he served an important role as a change champion—and drew attention
to weak bench strength in the organization’s supervisory ranks. Try the same
approach in your organization—or find just one top manager who will pose a
similar question to colleagues by e-mail. That will certainly draw attention to
the issue. It may also open debate or create an impetus for change.
Conduct a Written Survey
A written survey may be used as an alternative to informal discussions. Unlike
informal discussions, however, a written survey is a high-profile effort. Many
people will probably see it. For that reason, be sure to follow the organization’s
protocol for authorizing a written survey. That may mean discussing it,
prior to distribution, with the CEO, the vice president of human resources, or
others they suggest. Ask for their approval to conduct the survey—and solicit
their input for questions of interest to them. In some organizations they may
also wish to attach their own cover letters to the survey, which is desirable
because it demonstrates their awareness and support—and may even increase
the response rate.
Use the survey appearing in Exhibit 5-4 as a starting point, if you wish. It
may save you time in developing your own survey, tailor-made to your organization’s
needs.
Once the survey has been completed, feed the results back to the decisionmakers.
In that way they can read for themselves what their peers have to say
about the organization’s current approach to SP&M. That can help them focus
on specific problems to be solved and on achieving a consensus for action
among themselves. However, conducting surveys is not without risk. They
may, for instance, bring to the surface influential opposition to a systematic
SP&M program. That will make it more difficult to make the case for that approach
in the future.
Demonstrating the Need
Few decision-makers are willing to invest time, money, or effort in any activity
from which they believe few benefits will be derived. It is thus essential to tie
SP&M issues directly to pressing organizational problems and to the organization’s
core mission. But exactly how is that done?
(text continues on page 104)

102 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 5-4. A Questionnaire for Assessing the Status of Succession
Planning and Management in an Organization
Cover Memo
To: Top Managers of Corporation
From:
Subject: Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices
Date:
Succession planning and management may be understood as ‘‘any effort designed
to ensure the continued effective performance of an organization, division, department,
or work group by making provision for the development, replacement, and
strategic application of key people over time.’’ It may be systematic or informal. In
systematic SP&M, an organization’s managers attempt to prepare successors for key
positions; in informal succession planning, no effort is made to prepare successors—and,
as vacancies occur in key positions, managers respond to the crises at
that time.
Please take a few minutes to respond to the questions appearing below. When you
are finished, return the completed survey to (name) by(date) at(location). Should
you have questions, feel free to call me at (phone number).
Thank you for your cooperation!
The Survey
Directions: Please take a few minutes to write down your responses to each question
appearing below. This questionnaire is intended to be anonymous, though you are
free to sign your name if you wish. You will receive a confidential report that summarizes
the key responses of all respondents and recommends action steps.
1. In your opinion, how well is this organization presently conducting SP&M ?
(Circle your response in the left column)
Very Well
Adequately
Inadequately
Very Poorly
Briefly explain why you feel as you do:

Making the Case for Major Change
103
2. Should this organization establish/improve its approaches to SP&M?
Yes
Briefly explain why you feel as you do:
No
3. In your area of responsibility, have you established:
(Circle your response in the center column below)
Question
Response
Yes
No
A. A systematic means to identify pos- Yes No
sible replacement needs stemming
from retirement or other predictable
losses of people?
B. A systematic approach to perform- Yes No
ance appraisal so as to clarify
each individual’s current performance?
C. A systematic approach to identify- Yes No
ing individuals who have the potential
to advance one or more
levels beyond their current positions?
D. A systematic approach by which to Yes No
accelerate the development of individuals
who have the potential to
advance one or more levels beyond
their current positions?
E. A means by which to keep track of Yes No
possible replacements by key position?
Your Comments
4. What special issues, if any, do you believe that a systematic SP&M program
designed and introduced in this organization should be careful to address?
(continues)

104 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 5-4. (continued)
5. What other comments do you have to make about a systematic SP&M program?
Please return the completed survey to (name)by(date)at(location). Should you
have questions, feel free to call me at (phone number). You will receive a summary
of the anonymous survey results by (date).
Thank You for Your Cooperation!
The answer to that question may vary across organizations. Each organization
is unique; each organization has its own culture, history, and leadership
group. But there are several possible ways by which to demonstrate the need
for a systematic SP&M program. They are described below.
Hitchhiking on Crises
The first way to demonstrate need is to hitchhike on crises. As key positions
become vacant or key people depart unexpectedly, seize that opportunity to
poll decision-makers informally. Begin by summarizing the recent crisis. Contrast
what happened with what could have happened if a systematic approach
to SP&M had been used. Describe the impact of poorly planned SP&M on
customers and employees, if possible. Then describe possible future conditions—especially
future staffing needs that may result from recent downsizing,
early retirement offers, or employee buyouts. Ask decision-makers whether
they believe it is time to explore a systematic approach to meeting succession
needs. Then be ready to offer a concrete proposal for the next steps to take.
Seizing Opportunities
A second way to demonstrate need is to seize opportunities. In one organization,
for example, the human resources department studied top managers’
ages and projected retirement dates. The results were astonishing: all the top
managers were due to retire within five years and no replacements had been
identified or developed. In that case, the HR department detected a brewing
crisis and helped avert it. The organization subsequently established a systematic
SP&M program that enjoyed strong support—and great success.
Any major strategic change will normally create opportunities. For instance,
as electrical utilities are deregulated, decision-makers realize that the
future success (and even survival) of these organizations often depends on
identifying and developing new leaders who can thrive in a highly competitive,
market-driven environment. That raises questions about the developmental

Making the Case for Major Change
105
needs of successors who had been nurtured during a period of regulation. It
also prompts developmental activities to increase the market-oriented skills of
future leaders.
Use the worksheet appearing in Exhibit 5-5 to focus attention on ways to
hitchhike on crises and to seize opportunities.
Showing the Bottom-Line Value
A third way to demonstrate the need for a systematic SP&M program might be
called showing the bottom-line value. However, making that case for SP&M
can be tough to do. As Jac Fitz-enz writes:
One of the difficulties in trying to measure the
work of planners is that their output is primarily
a plan of the future. By definition, we will
not know for 1, 3 or perhaps 5 years how accurate
their predictions were. In addition no
one is capable of predicting future events,
and therefore it is not fair to blame the planner
for unforeseeable events. It is impossible
to measure the value of a long-term plan in the
short term. Planners thus often feel frustrated
because they cannot prove their worth with
concrete evidence. 1
Those involved in succession planning and management may feel that they
face exactly the same frustrations to which Fitz-enz alludes. However, he has
suggested ways to measure each of the following:
▲ Workload (How many positions need to be filled?)
▲ Speed of Filling Positions (How long does it take to fill positions?)
▲ Results (How many positions were filled over a given time span?)
Succession planning and management may thus be measured by the number
of key positions to be filled, the length of time required to fill them, and
the number of key positions filled over a given time span. Of course, these
measures are not directly tied to such bottom-line results for an organization
as return on equity, return on investment, or cost-benefit analysis. But they are
good places to start.
As Fitz-enz rightly points out, the central questions to consider when quantifying
program results are these 2 :

106 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 5-5. A Worksheet for Demonstrating the Need for Succession
Planning and Management
Directions: How can the need for a systematic SP&M program be demonstrated in
an organization? Use the questions below to help you organize your thinking. Answer
each question in the space appearing below it. Then compare your responses
to those of others in the organization. Add paper if necessary.
1. What crises, if any, have occurred in placing high-potential individuals or filling
key positions in recent years? Describe the situations and how the organization
coped with them. Then describe what happened (the outcomes of those strategies).
Make a list of the crises, if any, and briefly describe:
2. What opportunities, if any, have you noticed that may affect the knowledge,
skills, and abilities that will be needed by workers in the organization in the
future? (In particular, list strategic changes and then draw conclusions about
their implications for knowledge, skills, and abilities.)
Describe how those strategic changes are likely to af-
fect the knowledge, skills, and abilities needed by
workers in the organization in the future:
Make a list of
strategic changes:
▲ What variables are really important to the organization?
▲ What results can be influenced by action?
Meaningful, quantifiable results can be obtained only by focusing attention
directly on answering these questions. Decision-makers must be asked what
they believe to be the most important variables and actions that can be taken
by the organization. This information, then, becomes the basis for establishing
the financial benefits of an SP&M program.
When measuring SP&M results, decision-makers may choose to focus on
such issues as these:
▲ How long does it take to fill key positions? (Measure the average elapsed
days per position vacancy.)

Making the Case for Major Change
107
▲ What percentage of key positions are actually filled from within? (Divide
the number of key positions filled from within by the total number of
key positions.)
▲ What percentage of key positions are capable of being filled from
within? (Divide the number of high-potential workers available by the
number of expected key position vacancies annually.)
▲ What is the percentage of successful replacements out of all replacements?
(Divide the number of retained replacements in key positions
by all replacements made to key positions.)
Of course, issues of importance to top managers, and appropriate measures
of bottom-line results, will vary across organizations. The point is that these
issues must be identified before appropriate criteria and bottom-line measures
can be assigned. Indeed, the best ways to measure SP&M results come from
the goals and objectives established for the SP&M program.
Another way to view the bottom-line measure of a SP&M program is to
compare the expenses of operating the program to the benefits accruing from
it. That may be difficult, but it is not impossible to do. As a first step, identify
direct and indirect program expenses. Direct expenses result solely from operating
an SP&M program. An example might be the salary of a full- or parttime
SP&M coordinator. Indirect expenses result only partially from program
operations. They may include partial salary expenses for managers involved in
developing future leaders or the cost of materials to develop high potentials.
As a second step, identify direct and indirect program benefits. (This can
be tricky, but the key to success is involving decision-makers so that they accept
and have ownership in the program benefits that are claimed.) Direct
benefits are quantifiable and financially oriented. They might include savings
in the fees of search firms. Indirect benefits might include the goodwill of
having immediate successors prepared to step in, temporarily or permanently,
whenever vacancies occur in key positions.
As a third step, compare the costs and benefits. Will the organization gain
financially if a systematic approach to SP&M is adopted? In what ways? How
can the relative effectiveness of the program be related directly to the organization’s
pressing business issues and core mission?
For additional information on cost-benefit analysis, review the numerous
approaches that have been suggested for evaluating the bottom-line value of
training programs. 3 Use those approaches to clarify costs and benefits of a
systematic SP&M program.
Of course, other ways—apart from hitchhiking on crises, seizing opportunities,
and showing the cost-benefit ratio for program operations—might be
used to demonstrate the need for a systematic approach to SP&M. Consider:
How has the need been successfully demonstrated for other new programs in
the organization? Can similar approaches be used to demonstrate a need for a
systematic SP&M program?

108 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Determining Organizational Requirements
All organizations do not share identical requirements for SP&M programs. Differences
exist owing to the organization’s industry, size, stage of maturity,
management values, internally available expertise, cost, time, and other considerations.
Past surveys confirm that these issues—and others—can affect the
appropriate design of SP&M programs. 4
However, top management goals are always key considerations. What do
top managers believe to be essential for a SP&M program? The most important
questions on which to focus attention might include the following:
▲ How eager are top managers and other decision-makers to systematize
the organization’s SP&M process(es)?
▲ How much time and attention are decision-makers willing to devote to
assessing key position requirements? Identifying leadership competencies?
Identifying success factors for advancement in the organization?
Conducting multirater assessments? Appraising individual performance?
Preparing and implementing individual development plans (IDPs)
to ensure the efficient preparation of individuals for advancement into
key positions?
▲ How stable is the current organizational structure? Work processes? Can
either—or both—be reliably used to plan for leadership continuity or
replacements?
▲ How willing are decision-makers to devote resources to cultivating talent
from within?
▲ How much do decision-makers prefer to fill key position vacancies from
inside rather than from outside the organization?
▲ How willing are decision-makers to use innovative alternatives to simple
replacements from within?
Begin determining the essential requirements of an SP&M program by interviewing
top managers. Pose the questions appearing above. Add others as pertinent
to the organization. (As a starting point, use the interview guide
appearing in Exhibit 5-6 for this purpose.) Then prepare and circulate a written
proposal for an SP&M program that conforms to the consensus opinion of
key decision-makers.
Linking Succession Planning and Management Activities to
Organizational and Human Resource Strategy
Succession planning and management should be linked to organizational and
human resource strategy. However, achieving those linkages can be difficult.

Making the Case for Major Change
109
Exhibit 5-6. An Interview Guide for Determining the Requirements for a
Succession Planning and Management Program
Directions: Use this interview guide to help you formulate the requirements for a
systematic SP&M program for an organization. Arrange to meet with top managers
in your organization. Pose the questions appearing in the left column below. Record
notes in the right column below. Then use the results of the interview as the basis for
preparing a proposal for a systematic SP&M program for the organization. (You
may add questions to the left column, if you wish.)
Questions
1. What are your thoughts about approaching
succession planning and management in this
organization in a planned way?
Notes on Responses
2. How should we define key positions in this organization?
3. How should we clarify the requirements to
qualify for key positions? (Some people call
these competencies—characteristics of successful
performers.)
4. How should we assess current individual job
performance?
5. How stable do you believe the current organizational
structure to be? Will it be adequate to
use as the basis for identifying key positions requiring
successors in the future?
(continues)

110 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 5-6. (continued)
Questions
6. How do we determine the qualifications or requirements
(competencies) for each key position
in the future?
Notes on Responses
7. How do you feel that we can identify individuals
who have the potential to meet the qualifications
for key positions in the future?
8. What do you believe are the essential resources
that must be provided by the organization
in order to accelerate the development of
high-potential employees?
9. How should we keep track of high-potential
employees?
10. What other thoughts do you have about the
essential requirements for an effective succession
planning and management program in
this organization? Why do you believe they are
essential?

Making the Case for Major Change
111
Linking Organizational Strategy and Succession Planning and
Management
Organizational strategy refers to the way in which a business chooses to compete.
Important steps in the process include: (1) determining the organization’s
purpose, goals, and objectives; (2) scanning the external environment
to identify future threats and opportunities; (3) appraising the organization’s
present strengths and weaknesses; (4) examining the range of strategies; (5)
choosing a strategy that is likely to seize maximum advantage from future opportunities
by building on organizational strengths; (6) implementing strategy,
particularly through changes in structure, policy, leadership, and rewards; and
(7) evaluating strategy periodically to assess how well it is helping the organization
to achieve its strategic goals and objectives.
Achieving effective linkage between organizational strategy and SP&M is
difficult for three major reasons. First, while effective strategy implementation
depends on having the right people in the right places at the right times, it is
not always clear who the right people are, where the right places are, and
when those people will be needed. Second, strategy is frequently expressed in
a way that does not lend itself easily to developing action plans for SP&M. For
instance, decision-makers may focus attention on ‘‘increasing market share’’
or ‘‘increasing return-on-investment’’—without describing what kind of leadership
will be needed to achieve those ambitious goals. Third, organizational
strategy as practiced may differ from organizational strategy as theorized, 5
which complicates the process of matching leadership to strategy. That can
happen when the daily decisions do not match written organizational strategy.
To overcome these problems, decision-makers must take active steps to
build consideration of SP&M issues into the formulation of strategic plans.
During the review of organizational strengths and weaknesses, for instance,
decision-makers should consider the organization’s leadership talent. What
kind of expertise is presently available? During strategic choice and implementation,
decision-makers should also consider whether the organization has the
right talent to ‘‘make it happen.’’ Who possesses the knowledge and skills
that will contribute most effectively to making the strategy a reality? How can
individuals be developed to help them acquire that knowledge and those
skills? How can the organization establish an action plan to manage its human
assets as effectively as its financial assets? Only by answering these questions—
and taking active steps to narrow the gap between available and necessary
talent—can the organization link its strategy and its succession planning and
management.
Linking Human Resource Strategy and Succession Planning and
Management
Human resource strategy is the means that the organization chooses to make
the most effective use of its HR programs and activities to satisfy organizational

112 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
needs. Important steps in this process parallel those in organizational strategy
making: (1) determining the purpose, goals, and objectives of the HR function;
(2) scanning the external environment to identify future threats and opportunities
affecting HR inside and outside the organization; (3) appraising the organization’s
present HR strengths and weaknesses; (4) examining the range of
HR strategies available; (5) choosing an HR strategy that is likely to support
the organizational strategy; (6) implementing HR strategy through changes in
such programs as training, selection, compensation, benefits, and labor relations;
and (7) evaluating HR strategy periodically for how well it supports organizational
strategy.
Unfortunately, efforts to integrate HR strategy and organizational strategy
have met with only mixed success. As Golden and Ramanujam write, ‘‘the
lack of integration between human resource management (HRM) and strategic
business planning (SBP) processes is increasingly acknowledged as a major
source of implementation failures. It is often alleged that companies develop
strategic plans based on extensive marketing and financial data but neglect the
human resource requirements necessary to successfully implement them.’’ 6
Numerous theories have been developed over the years to identify ways to
link organizational and HR strategy. 7 However, little evidence exists to show
that great strides have been made in this area. 8
To link HR planning and SP&M, decision-makers should examine how well
HR policies and practices help—or hinder—leadership continuity, individual
advancement, and the cultivation of internal talent. More specifically:
▲ How does the organization conduct recruitment, selection, and placement?
How much consideration is given during this process to longterm
retention and development of prospective or new employees?
▲ How does the organization conduct training, education, and development?
How much (relative) attention is given to the long-term cultivation
of employee talent—as opposed to focusing attention on training
individuals to meet immediate requirements?
▲ How well do existing compensation and benefit practices support internal
placement? Transfers? Promotions? Are actual disincentives established
to dissuade employees from wanting to accept promotions or
assume leadership roles?
▲ How do existing labor relations agreements affect the organization’s
promotion, rotation, transfer, and other employment practices?
To integrate HR strategy and SP&M, examine existing HR program efforts—
such as selection, training, compensation, and benefits—against succession
planning and management needs. Identify HR practices that could encourage
or that presently discourage effective SP&M. Then take active steps to ensure
that HR practices facilitate, and do not impede, long-term efforts to groom
talent from within.

Making the Case for Major Change
113
Benchmarking Best Practices and Common Business
Practices in Other Organizations
Discussions with top managers and other key decision-makers in an organization
should yield valuable information about the needs that an SP&M program
should meet. But that information can be supplemented by benchmarking
SP&M practices in other organizations. Moreover, the results of benchmarking
may intensify the interests of key decision-makers in SP&M because they may
demonstrate that other organizations are using better, or more effective, methods.
As Robert C. Camp explains, ‘‘Only the approach of establishing operating
targets and productivity programs based on industry best practices leads to
superior performance. That process, being used increasingly in U.S. business,
is known as benchmarking.’’ 9
Benchmarking has also surfaced in recent years as a powerful tool for improving
organizational work processes and is frequently associated with Total
Quality Management (TQM). Its primary value is to provide fresh perspectives,
and points for comparison, from other organizations. It can thereby accelerate
the process of introducing a state-of-the-art program by comparing existing
practices in one organization to the best practices already in use elsewhere.
Although there are various means by which to conduct benchmarking,
Camp suggests that it should be carried out in the following way 10 :
1. Identify what is to be benchmarked.
2. Identify comparative companies.
3. Determine a data collection method and collect data.
4. Determine the current performance ‘‘gap.’’
5. Project future performance levels.
6. Communicate benchmark findings and gain acceptance.
7. Establish functional goals (based on the results of the benchmarking
study).
8. Develop action plans (based on the results of the benchmarking
study).
9. Implement specific actions and monitor progress.
10. Recalibrate benchmarks.
Typically, then, benchmarking begins when decision-makers make a commitment.
They clarify their objectives and draft questions to which they seek
answers. Comparable organizations, often but not always in the same industry,
are chosen. A suitable data collection method is selected, and written questionnaires
and interview guides are frequently used for data collection. Site
visits (field trips) are arranged to one or more organizations identified as being
‘‘best-in-class.’’

114 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Benchmarking should not be pursued as a ‘‘fishing expedition’’; rather, it
should be guided by specific objectives and questions. Participants should start
out with some familiarity with the process, such as succession planning and
management practices. (That may mean that they have to be briefed before
participating in a site visit.) Several key decision-makers should go on the site
visits so they can compare practices in other organizations with their own.
That is an excellent way, too, to win over skeptics and demonstrate that ‘‘the
way we have always done it here’’ may not be the best approach.
Most Fortune 500 companies are well known for their effective succession
planning and management practices. Blue-chip firms such as Motorola, Xerox,
IBM, AT&T, General Electric, Coca-Cola, and General Motors—among others—are
recognized for conducting effective succession planning and management.
They may rightly be considered ‘‘best-in-class’’ companies. Appropriate
contacts at these organizations should be located through such professional
societies as the Human Resource Planning Society (P.O. Box 2553, Grand Central
Station, New York, NY 10163), the American Management Association
(1601 Broadway, New York, NY 10019), the American Society for Training and
Development (1640 King Street, Alexandria, VA 22313), or the Society for
Human Resource Management (606 N. Washington Street, Alexandria, VA
22314).
Always develop questions before making a site visit. (See the list of possible
benchmarking questions in Exhibit 5-7.) Then contact representatives from
two or three of those organizations and ask if benchmarking visits to their
locations are possible. If so, send them the questions in advance of the visit so
that they have time to prepare their responses. Sometimes they may wish to
see the questions in advance before they commit to a visit.
It may be difficult to arrange benchmarking visits on SP&M. Many organizations
consider the process sensitive to their operations—and revealing of their
corporate strategies. Consequently, one approach is to seek access to organizations
where you or others in your company have personal contacts. If necessary,
begin with local organizations that have successfully established SP&M
programs. Identify them by talking to your peers in local chapters of the American
Society for Training and Development (ASTD), the Society for Human Resource
Management (SHRM), or other professional societies.
Obtaining and Building Management Commitment
Securing management commitment to systematic SP&M may not occur rapidly.
Skeptics are difficult to convince in short order. It will take time and proof
of tangible evidence of success to win them over.
Opinions About Succession Planning and Management
My 2004 survey of SP&M practices revealed sharp disparities in opinions about
systematic SP&M programs. Examine Exhibit 5-8. Then consider how you
(text continues on page 118)

Making the Case for Major Change
115
Exhibit 5-7. An Interview Guide for Benchmarking Succession Planning and
Management Practices
Directions: Use this interview guide to help you prepare questions in advance of a
benchmarking visit to another organization. Share these questions before your visit
to an organization known for its effective SP&M practices. (Add questions as appropriate
for your organization.) Pose the questions appearing in the left column below.
Then record notes in the right column. Use the results in formulating a proposal for
improving SP&M practices in your organization.
Questions
1. What mission statement has been established
for succession planning and management in
your organization?
Notes on Responses
2. What goals and objectives have been established
for succession planning and management
in your organization?
3. What policy and philosophy statement has
been written to guide succession planning and
management in your organization? (Would it
be possible to obtain a copy?)
4. How does your organization define key positions?
What positions, if any, are given special
attention in your succession planning program?
Why are they given that attention?
(continues)

116 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 5-7. (continued)
5. How does your organization identify, describe,
or clarify the requirements of key positions?
(For example, has your organization made an
effort to identify job responsibilities, competencies,
or success factors by level?)
6. How does your organization assess current job
performance for succession planning and
management purposes? (Do you use the organization’s
existing performance appraisal system—or
something else?)
7. Does your organization use replacement charts
based on the current organization chart? (If
not, why?)
8. How does your organization determine the
qualifications, requirements, or competencies
for each key position in the future?
9. How does your organization attempt to integrate
succession planning and management
with organizational strategy? With human resource
strategy?

Making the Case for Major Change
117
Questions
10. How does your organization identify successors
for key positions?
Notes on Responses
11. How does your organization identify highpotential
employees (who are capable of
advancing two or more levels beyond their
current placement)?
12. How does your organization establish Individual
Development Plans (IDPs) to plan, guide,
and accelerate the development of high-potential
employees?
13. What special programs, if any, has your organization
established to accelerate the development
of high-potentials?
14. What special computer software, if any, does
your organization use in its succession planning
and management activities? Why was it
chosen?
15. How does your organization evaluate the results
of succession planning and management
activities?
(continues)

118 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 5-7. (continued)
16. What special problems has your organization
encountered with succession planning and
management? How have those been solved?
Exhibit 5-8. Opinions of Top Managers About Succession Planning and
Management
Question: How would you summarize the opinions of top managers in your organization
about a succession planning program? Circle all response codes below that
apply.
Opinions of Top Management
Percentage Response
They don’t believe succession planning is worth
the time required for it. 9%
They have no clue why such a program might
be worthwhile. 9%
They believe that a succession planning program
is worthwhile but are not aware of how to
manage it efficiently and effectively. 55%
They believe a succession planning program is
worthwhile and that a formal program is better
than an informal program. 27%
I don’t know what they think about a succession
planning program. - 0 -
Other Comments
None
Total 100%
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).
would answer those questions about top management opinions in your organization.
Turn then to Exhibit 5-9 and consider how you would characterize
your own opinions about systematic SP&M.
Understanding How to Secure Management Commitment
To understand how to secure management commitment, Diane Dormant’s
classic ABCD model remains a helpful tool. 11 ABCD is an acronym based on

Making the Case for Major Change
119
Exhibit 5-9. Opinions of Human Resource Professionals About Succession
Planning and Management
Question: How would you summarize your opinions about a succession planning
program? Circle all response codes below that apply.
Your Opinions
Percentage Response
I don’t believe such a program is important. - 0 -
I believe that other methods work better in identifying and
preparing possible successors. - 0 -
I believe a succession planning program is worthwhile but
other programs are more important for this organization
right now. - 0 -
I believe a succession planning program is important. 36%
Succession planning is critically important to this organization
at this time. 64%
Other Opinions
None
Total 100%
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).
the first letter of several key words. Dormant’s model suggests that large-scale
organizational change—such as the introduction of a systematic SP&M program—can
be understood by examining adopters (who is affected by the
change?), blackbox (what is the change process?), change agent (who is making
the change?), and domain (the change context). 12
The most valuable feature of Dormant’s model is her view that different
strategies are appropriate at different stages in the introduction of a change.
The change agent should thus, to facilitate change, take actions that are keyed
to the adopter’s stage in accepting an innovation.
Dormant believes that adopters progress through five identifiable stages in
accepting an innovation. 13 During the first stage—awareness—adopters have
little information about the innovation. They are passive and are generally
unwilling to seek information. In that stage, change agents should advertise
the innovation, making efforts to attract attention and provide positive information.
In the second stage—self-concern—adopters are more active. They express
concern about how they will be individually affected by a change and pose
questions about the consequences of an innovation. Change agents in this
stage should enact the role of counselor, answering questions and providing
relevant information.

120 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
In mental tryout—the third stage—adopters remain active and ask pointed
questions related to their own applications of an innovation. Change agents
should enact the role of demonstrators, providing relevant examples and demonstrating
to adopters how they may apply an innovation to their unique situations.
In hands-on trial—the fourth stage—adopters are interested in learning
how to apply an innovation to their own situations. Their opinions about the
innovation are being formed from personal experience. Change agents should
provide them with training and detailed feedback about how well they are
applying the innovation. Testimonials of success will be persuasive during this
stage, helping to shape the conclusions reached by the adopters about an innovation.
Adoption is the fifth and final stage. By this point adopters have integrated
the innovation into their work and are interested in specific problem solving
that is related to their own applications. Change agents should provide personal
support, help adopters find the resources they need to perform effectively,
and provide rewards for successful implementation.
Applying these stages to the process of obtaining and building management
support for systematic SP&M should be apparent. The appropriate strategies
that change agents should use depend on the stage of acceptance. (See
Exhibit 5-10.)
An important point to bear in mind is that a succession planning program
will be effective only when it enjoys support from its stakeholders. Indeed, the
stakeholders must perform SP&M for it to work. In short, they must own the
process. Hence, obtaining and building management commitment to SP&M is
essential for a systematic program to work.
The Key Role of the CEO in the Succession Effort
The CEO’s role in the SP&M process is the key to success—or failure—in private-sector
organizations. Let me state it clearly: It is a make-or-break role.
While it may seem that CEOs are asked to be ‘‘involved’’ in everything, which
is sometimes interpreted to mean ‘‘give lip service to it and then delegate it,’’
SP&M does not fall in that category. To put it in blunt terms, if the CEO is not
hands-on involved in leading the succession effort, it will fail. SP&M cannot be
just delegated to the HR department, for the simple reason that HR cannot
hold senior executives accountable for talent development in the same way
that the CEO can. Well-known CEOs like former G.E. Chairman Jack Welch
devote much of their time to thinking about, and acting on, succession issues.
14
Fortunately, several factors have come together to put SP&M on the CEO’s
personal radar screen. One factor is that boards of directors are becoming
more involved with succession. Consider:

Making the Case for Major Change
121
Exhibit 5-10. Actions to Build Management Commitment to Succession
Planning and Management
Stage of Acceptance
Appropriate Actions
Awareness Advertise SP&M to management employees.
Provide general information about SP&M.
Self-Concern Answer questions.
Provide relevant information.
Mental Tryout Provide relevant examples of applications of
SP&M policy/practices to specific functions or activities
within the organization.
Demonstrate how SP&M may be used in each organizational
area.
Hands-on Trial Offer training on SP&M.
Meet with top managers individually to discuss SP&M
in their areas.
Collect and disseminate testimonials of success.
Adoption Provide personal support to top managers on applications
of systematic SP&M.
Help program users perform effectively through individualized
feedback and counseling.
Identify appropriate rewards for SP&M.
Succession planning has become the second
most important topic discussed by boards.
(Top of the list is making sure that the right
chief executive is in place to begin with.) The
frequency with which chief executives come
and go adds to the pressure. The average
chief executive’s tenure has dwindled in the
past decade from eight years to less than five.
That leaves little time to groom the next generation.
Big companies rarely pick from outside.
To do so is usually a sign that they are in
trouble. For the board, drawing up a succession
plan is a good way to spot future problems.
But there are advantages for the boss,
too. After all, one way to secure a sort of immortality
is to pick one’s own successor. In
most companies, the succession process is
controlled mainly by the chief executive.

122 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
However, many CEOs are uncooperative,
partly because they hate the idea of retirement.
Even Disney now listens. Sarah Teslik, executive
director of the Council of Institutional
Investors, a lobbying group, says that she has
demanded for years that Disney draw up a
succession plan, but Michael Eisner, the company’s
domineering CEO, has refused to
allow it. When she talked to senior Disney executives
two months ago, they assured her
that a plan now existed—although they refused
to say what it is. Ms. Teslik thinks that
behavior has been changed by the insistence
in the Sarbanes-Oxley Act that boards meet
in ‘‘executive session’’—that is, without the
executives present. ‘‘I personally asked Mr.
Sarbanes for this provision for that purpose,’’
she recalls. ‘‘How can directors talk about
your succession while you are in the room?’’ 15
A new survey of boardroom practice by Korn/Ferry International, another
search consultancy, finds that only 33 percent of boards had a management
succession committee or process in 2001. By this year, that had leapt to 77
percent.
A second factor is that aging senior executives have placed personal pressure
on CEOs to pay attention to succession, lest they find themselves saddled
with the workload of a retiring senior executive while harried HR staff try
to source a qualified replacement. A third factor is that terrorism has made
succession a prudent risk-management issue—one sure to be brought up by
increasingly cautious auditors.
But what exactly should CEOs do? Here are some practical suggestions:
1. Discuss the issue with the board, his or her key reports, and the VP of
HR to decide what succession program would be most desirable for the
organization. Of course, that information can be gathered by an external
consultant—often a good idea—and then handed to the CEO in a
report that recommends actions and next steps.
2. Become familiar enough with issues associated with succession to be
able to discuss the topic intelligently. That includes otherwise arcane
topics—to CEOs at least—such as competency modeling.
3. Insist on an action plan that senior executives can buy into.
4. Hold senior executives accountable for grooming talent in their divisions
and departments, perhaps by changing the executive bonus plan

Making the Case for Major Change
123
to put a portion of the bonus at risk for making or not making measurable
goals for talent development.
5. Chair periodic meetings of senior executives to discuss how they are
grooming talent—and especially HiPos—in their areas.
Of course, there is much more that CEOs can do. But they must be convinced
of the importance of SP&M to do anything. Just to provide a basis for reflection,
rate your CEO on his or her role in SP&M, using the simple rating sheet
in Exhibit 5-11.
Summary
When preparing to introduce a systematic succession planning program, begin
by assessing the organization’s current succession planning and management
problems and practices, demonstrating the business need for succession planning
and management, determining the organization’s unique succession
planning and management requirements, linking the succession planning and
management program to the organization’s strategic plans and human resource
plans, benchmarking succession planning and management processes
in other organizations, and obtaining and building management commitment.
This chapter has reviewed these steps and thereby demonstrated ways by
which to make the case for change. The next chapter emphasizes the importance
of clarifying the roles of each level of management in the succession
planning and management program; developing a program mission statement,
policy, and philosophy; identifying target groups; and setting program
priorities.

124 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 5-11. Rating Your CEO for His/Her Role in Succession Planning
and Management
Directions: For each item listed in the left column below, check a box in the right
column to indicate whether your organization’s CEO is actively performing successfully.
Be honest.
The CEO of My Organization: Yes No
Takes a hands-on approach to succession issues.
Sets a positive example by choosing his or her own
successor.
Sets a positive example by developing his or her own
successor.
Considers succession issues whenever he or she
makes business decisions of strategic import.
Discusses his or her thinking about succession issues
with others.
Holds managers accountable for succession issues.
Holds managers accountable for developing talent.
Rewards managers for developing talent.
Chairs ‘‘talent shows’’ of the organization in which
the developmental needs of promising people are
discussed and by which senior managers are held accountable
for developing the people they have.
Total Score Number Number
(Add up the yes and no boxes and then insert the of Yes of No
sums where indicated at right. Obviously, the more Boxes Boxes
yes boxes your CEO has, the closer his/her role is to
being successfully engaged in the succession planning
and management efforts of your organization.)

C H A P T E R 6
STARTING A SYSTEMATIC PROGRAM
An organization should be ready to start a systematic succession planning and
management (SP&M) program once the case has been persuasively made that
one is needed. Starting a systematic SP&M program usually involves taking
such actions as conducting a risk analysis and building a commitment to
change; determining roles in the SP&M program; formulating a mission statement;
writing a program policy; clarifying the procedures; identifying groups
targeted for action; defining the roles in the SP&M program of the CEO, senior
managers, and others; and setting program priorities. This chapter focuses on
these issues.
Conducting a Risk Analysis and Building a Commitment
to Change
Where do an organization’s leaders begin in conducting a risk analysis? In
building a commitment to change? Those are, of course, related questions.
A risk analysis is simply an assessment of what level of risk an organization
faces owing to the loss of key people. (Key people exist at all levels and not
just at the top.) The risk analysis is conducted in one of several ways. For
example, one way has been mentioned earlier in this book. First, the organization’s
payroll system is used to project the estimated dates of retirement
eligibility for the entire workforce. Second, the percentage of the whole organization
eligible for retirement over rolling three-year periods is assessed.
Third, the same analysis is done by job code, geographical location, functional
area or department, and hierarchical level. The aim is to cast a wide net, looking
for trouble spots where high percentages of a whole group, such as the
entire accounting department or the St. Louis office, for example, would be
eligible for retirement during a given three-year period. Use three-year periods
because problems may not be apparent in a single year. But if the cumulative
percentage of the retirement-eligible workforce over a rolling three-year period
is high—say, over 50 percent—then you can mark it as a trouble spot and
move on.
The goal of this exercise is to find parts of the organization where the risks
125

126 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
are the highest of losing people. While skeptical managers may not see a need
for a succession program for an entire organization, they can be convinced to
do something if they see a high percentage of the entire workforce or those in
one area are affected.
There are other ways to do risk analysis. Sometimes they can be just as
effective and persuasive to decision-makers. For instance:
▲ Do ‘‘what if’’ scenarios. Pose questions to decision-makers: How long
would it take to replace a key person owing to sudden death, disability, or
resignation? And what would the organization do in the meantime to ensure
that the work gets done? Ask decision-makers to estimate the economic or
other impacts that would result from the sudden loss of a key person at any
level.
▲ Do historical studies. Look to the past. Ask what key people losses have
been experienced by the organization in the past and how they were handled.
(I have found that the sudden loss of a handpicked successor for the CEO’s
job is sometimes a most persuasive way to launch an SP&M program, for the
simple reason that the CEO feels the pain personally and will not suffer in
silence for long.)
▲ Build awareness. Prepare a simple visual aid with the organization chart
showing, in red, the percentage of people at risk of loss owing to retirement;
prepare another visual aid that shows the years of experience at risk of loss in
key departments.
Other approaches to building persuasive cases for action are possible. Data
and measurements can help. Just think—what data are most likely to convince
decision-makers of the need to establish a succession program, and how can
that data be gathered? Then set out to collect that information, analyze it, and
present it to decision-makers. Do not forget, however, that decision-makers,
once convinced of the need for action, will expect you to have in hand an
action plan or series of recommendations about how to establish the SP&M
program.
Clarifying Program Roles
What are roles? How can roles in an SP&M program be clarified so that organizational
members know what they should do to support the effort? This section
answers these questions.
Understanding Roles
A role is an expected pattern of behaviors and is usually linked to a job in
the organization. Although most organizations outline responsibilities in job
descriptions, few job descriptions are sufficiently detailed to clarify how job
incumbents should carry out their duties or interact with others. However,

Starting a Systematic Program
127
roles do permit such clarification. Indeed, ‘‘a role may include attitudes and
values as well as specific kinds of behavior. It is what an individual must do in
order to validate his or her occupancy of a particular position.’’ 1
Role theory occupies a central place in writings about management and
organizations. Internalizing a role has often been compared to the communication
process. (See Exhibit 6-1.) Role senders (role incumbents) bring to their
roles expectations about what they should do, how they should do it, and how
they should interact with others. Their expectations are influenced by their
previous education, experience, values, and background. They are also influenced
by what they are told about the role during the recruitment, training,
and selection process. Role receivers—others in the organization with whom
role senders interact—observe these behaviors and draw conclusions from
them based on their own expectations. They provide feedback to indicate
whether the behavior matches what they expect. That feedback, in turn, may
affect the role senders’ expectations and behaviors.
To complicate matters, individuals enact more than one role in organizations.
For instance, they may serve as superiors, colleagues, and subordinates.
They may also enact roles outside the organization, such as spouse, parent,
child, citizen, churchgoer, or professional. Each role may carry its own culturally
bound expectations for behavior.
Enacting multiple roles can lead to role conflict. For example, supervisors
may be expected by their employers to act in the best interests of the organization.
That means they must occasionally make hard-eyed business decisions.
On the other hand, supervisors may also be expected to represent the interests
and concerns of their subordinates to the employer. To cite another example,
human resource managers may perceive their role to be facilitative and feel
that they should provide advice to operating managers when they decide HR
issues. But operating managers may expect them to act forcefully and proac-
Exhibit 6-1. A Model for Conceptualizing Role Theory
Role senders
(with
internalized
expectations
about their
role).
Take
action.
Role receivers
(with
internalized
expectations
for the role).
Interpret
action.
Provide
feedback
about match
or mismatch
with role
expectations.
Feedback may change role senders' expectations.

128 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
tively on their own, spearheading new initiatives and taking steps to avert
future HR problems. In both examples, conflicting expectations may lead role
incumbents to experience pressure and frustration. Effective performance is
influenced by congruence in role expectations. Role senders can achieve desired
results only when they know what they are expected to do and when
role receivers make their expectations clear.
Applying Role Theory to Succession Planning and Management
As role theory indicates, performance is influenced by shared role expectations.
As one step in establishing systematic SP&M, clarify program roles so
that individuals throughout the organization are aware of what they are expected
to do and how they are expected to behave.
At the outset, direct attention to the roles to be enacted by three important
groups: (1) management employees, (2) program facilitators, and (3) program
participants. These roles may overlap. In each case, however, it is important to
bring to the surface what group members already believe about their roles in
SP&M, feed that information back to them, provide information about alternative
roles, and seek consensus on desirable roles.
Think of the roles of management employees as ranging along one continuum
from active to passive and along another continuum from supporter to
opponent. (See the grid in Exhibit 6-2 to help conceptualize those roles.) Management
employees who take an active role believe that SP&M should occupy
much of their time. They should be defining present work requirements,
planning for future work requirements, appraising individual performance,
assessing individual potential, planning for individual development, and participating
in developmental activities. On the other hand, management employees
who take a passive role believe that issues other than SP&M should
occupy their time. A supporter sees systematic SP&M as a valuable activity; an
opponent has reservations about it.
Think of facilitators’ roles as ranging along a continuum from directive to
nondirective. Facilitators who take a directive role indicate what they expect
from those participating in a systematic SP&M program. They then attempt to
enforce these expectations, providing briefings, training, or written directions
to help others understand what they are supposed to do. Operating managers
and top managers who are assigned responsibilities as SP&M coordinators may
adopt that role, particularly during the start-up phase when many may be confused
about what they are supposed to do.
On the other hand, facilitators who take a nondirective role attempt to
identify what various stakeholders want from the program and what behaviors
the stakeholders believe to be associated with those desired program results.
They collect information from stakeholders, feed it back to them, and help
them establish their own roles and action plans. Much time may be spent

Starting a Systematic Program
129
Exhibit 6-2. Management Roles in Succession Planning and Management:
A Grid
Active Champions succession Opposes succession
planning efforts vigor- planning vigorously.
ously. Views management’s
Level of Views management’s role as one geared to
Effort role as one geared to making profits—even
developing and motiva- when that means demotting
people.
ivating people.
Passive Expresses general sup- Prefers to devote time to
port for succession plan- other activities.
ning, with reservations
about some approaches.
Wishes more ‘‘study’’
and ‘‘analysis’’ to be
conducted.
Supporter
Level of Support
Opponent
individually, helping managers and employees at different levels understand
what their roles should be.
Participant roles range along one continuum from aware to unaware and
along another continuum from organizationally focused to personally/individually
focused. Participants are defined as those tapped by the organization to
be involved in the SP&M process. They are usually designated to be developed
for one or more future positions. They may be aware or unaware that they
have been thus designated by the organization as possible successors. They
may be focused on satisfying their personal needs in the future (an individual
focus) or on satisfying the organization’s needs (an organizational focus).
To clarify roles, ask managers, facilitators, and participants to answer the
following questions:
▲ What are you presently doing to help the organization meet its succession
needs in the future?
▲ What should you do to help the organization establish a systematic
SP&M program to meet succession needs in the future?
▲ What do you believe should be the role(s) of managers and employees
in supporting an effective SP&M program in the organization?
Pose these questions in group or staff meetings or circulate written surveys as
appropriate. (If neither approach will work owing to a desire to keep an

130 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
SP&M program ‘‘secret,’’ then ask top managers these questions and ask how
roles to support SP&M may be clarified at other levels in the organization.)
Formulating a Mission Statement
Why is an organization undertaking a systematic succession planning program?
What outcomes do stakeholder groups desire from it? These questions should
be answered during the program start-up phase in order to achieve agreement
among stakeholders about the program’s purpose and desired results.
The lack of a mission statement has been called the Achilles’ heel of SP&M
programs. As Walter R. Mahler and Stephen J. Drotter have pointed out years
ago, these programs have too often been established without careful thought
given to purpose or desired outcomes. ‘‘Company after company,’’ they write,
‘‘rushed into program mechanics. Time went by and disillusionment set in.
The programs did not live up to their promises.’’ 2 The reason for this, they
believe, is that the program mission was never adequately clarified at the
outset.
What Is a Mission Statement?
A mission statement describes the purpose of a program or the reason for its
existence. Sometimes it is called a purpose statement. Mission and purpose
may be regarded as synonymous.
Formulating a mission statement is a first step in organizational planning.
Writers on organizational strategy suggest that formulating an organizational
mission should precede formulating strategy. An organizational mission statement
answers such questions as these: Why is the organization in business?
What results is it trying to achieve? What market does it serve? What products
or services does it offer?
Mission statements may also be formulated for organizational functions
(such as operations, finance, marketing, or personnel), divisions, locations, or
activities. At levels below the organization, mission statements for functions,
divisions, locations, or activities should answer such questions as these:
▲ Why does the function, division, location, or activity exist?
▲ How does it contribute to achieving the organization’s mission? Its strategic
plans?
▲ What outcomes or results are expected from it?
Mission statements may also provide philosophical statements (What do we
believe?), product or service descriptions (What is to be made or sold?), customer
descriptions (Whose needs are to be served?), and rationale (Why is the
mission worth performing?).

Starting a Systematic Program
131
What Questions Should Be Answered by a Mission Statement?
Like any organizational effort, an SP&M program should have a mission statement
to explain why it exists, what outcomes are desired from it, why those
outcomes are valuable, what products or services will be offered, who will be
served by the program, and other issues of importance. However, mission
statements for SP&M programs will vary across organizations. After all, not all
programs are designed to serve the same purpose, achieve the same results,
or offer the same products or services. So what specific issues should be addressed
in a mission statement for an SP&M program?
One way to begin to answer that question is to focus on issues of particular
importance to the organization. In that way, decision-makers will formulate
the program’s mission. Such issues may include:
1. What is a key position?
2. What is the definition of a high potential (HiPo)?
3. What is the organization’s responsibility in identifying HiPos, and what
should it be?
4. What is the definition of an exemplary performer?
5. What is the organization’s responsibility in identifying and rewarding
exemplary performers? What should it be?
6. How should the organization fill key positions?
7. What percentage of vacancies in key positions should be filled from
within? From outside? Handled through other means?
8. What percentage of key positions should have at least one identifiable
backup (successor)?
9. In what percentage of key positions should there be holes (that is, no
designated successors)?
10. What is the maximum time that exemplary performers should remain
in their positions?
11. What should be the maximum allowable percentage of avoidable turnover
among high potentials? Exemplary performers? What should be
done to reduce it?
12. What should be the maximum allowable percentage of failures in key
positions after individual advancement?
13. What percentage of key positions should be filled with employees
from legally protected labor groups—such as women, minorities, and
the disabled?
14. How desirable are international assignments for designated successors?
15. How should HiPos be prepared for advancement?
16. What should be the role and responsibility of each employee and the
HR department in the process of developing HiPos?

132 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
17. How much should individual career goals be exposed, considered,
and tracked in succession planning?
18. How openly should the organization communicate with individuals
who are identified to be HiPos about their status?
Of course, additional questions may also be posed to help clarify program
purpose. Use the Worksheet appearing in Exhibit 6-3 to help clarify the mission
of SP&M in an organization.
How Is a Mission Statement Prepared?
Prepare a mission statement by using any one of at least three possible approaches:
‘‘Ask, formulate, and establish’’; ‘‘Recommend and listen’’; or ‘‘Facilitate
an interactive debate.’’ In the ‘‘Ask, formulate, and establish’’ approach,
someone takes an initial step by ‘‘asking’’ questions about succession planning
in the organization. That launches a dialog to establish the program mission.
Often that duty falls to human resource generalists, human resource development
specialists, or management development specialists, although others—
such as the CEO, a vice president of human resources, or a specially appointed
SP&M coordinator—could function as change champions to focus attention
on the need for change. As a second step, change champions should compile
the answers received from different decision-makers. They should then ‘‘formulate’’
and circulate a proposal based on those answers. As a third and final
step, decision-makers hammer out their own responses, using the proposal as
a starting point. In so doing, they establish a mission statement for an SP&M
program.
A key advantage of this approach is that it requires little initial effort from
busy top managers. Others undertake the groundbreaking work to collect information
about SP&M, compile it, and base recommendations on it. (That is
what officers in the armed services call ‘‘staff work.’’) On the other hand, a
key disadvantage of this approach is that executives do not participate in the
information-gathering process, so they will have no collective ownership in
the results. A subsequent step is thus required to capture their support and
thereby achieve consensus on the necessary actions to take.
The ‘‘Recommend and listen’’ approach is different. It relies on considerable
expertise by the HR generalists, HRD specialists, or management and leadership
development specialists. To use this approach, they must start out with
a thorough grasp of the organization’s culture, top management desires and
values, and state-of-the-art SP&M practices. From that perspective, they ‘‘recommend’’
a starting point for the program, providing their own initial answers
to the key questions about the program mission listed in Exhibit 6-3. They
prepare and circulate their recommendations for a systematic SP&M program,
usually in proposal form. They then ‘‘listen’’ to reactions from key decision-

Starting a Systematic Program
133
Exhibit 6-3. A Worksheet to Formulate a Mission Statement for
Succession Planning and Management
Directions: Use this worksheet to help you formulate the mission of the succession
planning and management (SP&M) program in your organization. For each question
posed in the left column, write an answer in the right column. When you finish,
circulate the worksheet among decision-makers. Compile their responses and then
feed them back as a catalyst for subsequent decision making about the mission
statement of the succession planning and management program in the organization.
Add paper or questions appropriate to your organization as necessary.
Questions
1. What is a key position?
2. What is the definition of a highpotential
(HiPo)?
3. What is the organization’s responsibility
in identifying HiPos, and what
should it be?
4. What is the definition of an exemplary
performer?
5. What is the organization’s responsibility
in identifying and rewarding
exemplary performers? What
should it be?
6. How should the organization fill key
positions?
7. What percentage of vacancies in
key positions should be filled from
within? From without? Handled
through other means?
8. What percentage of key positions
should have at least one identifiable
backup (successor)?
9. In what percentage of key positions
should there be holes (that is, no
designated successors)?
Answers
(continues)

134 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 6-3. (continued)
Questions
10. What is the maximum time that exemplary
performers should remain
in their positions?
Answers
11. What should be the maximum allowable
percentage of avoidable
turnover among high-potentials?
Exemplary performers? What
should be done to reduce it?
12. What should be the maximum allowable
percentage of failures in
key positions after individual advancement?
13. What percentage of key positions
should be filled with employees
from legally protected labor
groups—such as women, minorities,
and the disabled?
14. How desirable are international assignments
for designated successors?
15. How should HiPos be prepared for
advancement?
16. What should be the role and responsibility
of each employee and
the HR Department in the process
of developing HiPos?
17. How much should individual career
goals be surfaced, considered, and
tracked in succession planning?
18. How openly should the organization
communicate with individuals
who are identified to be HiPos
about their status?

Starting a Systematic Program
135
19. Write a draft mission statement for
the succession planning and management
program of the organization
in this space. Be sure to answer
these questions: (1) Why does the
program exist? (2) How does it contribute
to achieving the organization’s
mission and strategic plans?
and (3) What measurable outcomes
or results should be expected
from it?
makers, using the initial proposal as a catalyst to stimulate debate and discussion.
The advantage of this approach is that it usually has a shorter cycle time
than ‘‘Ask, formulate, and establish.’’ It also relies more heavily on expert information
about state-of-the-art SP&M practices outside the organization,
thereby avoiding a tendency to reinvent the wheel. But these advantages exist
only when those using the approach have a thorough grasp of the organization’s
current SP&M problems and practices, culture, decision-maker
preferences, and state-of-the-art practices. Otherwise, it can provoke timeconsuming
conflicts among decision-makers that will only prolong efforts to
achieve top-level consensus.
The most complex approach is to ‘‘Facilitate an interactive debate.’’ HR
generalists, HRD specialists, management and leadership development specialists,
or others function as group facilitators rather than as expert-consultants.
The first step is to prepare a forum for key decision-makers to carry out
an ‘‘interactive debate’’ about the SP&M program’s mission. While the forum’s
content may be dictated by the CEO—or even by members of the board of
directors—HR professionals set up the process for the debate. (Content refers
to the issues on which the forum will focus; process refers to the means by
which those issues will be examined.) That usually means that the CEO and
the HR professional (or the CEO and an external facilitator) must work closely
together to plot the best means by which to explore the most important succession
planning and management issues. Such a debate may take the form of
an off-site retreat lasting several days or several meetings spread across several
months. During the debate, top-level decision-makers work through numerous
small-group activities to clarify the mission, philosophy, and procedures
governing the SP&M program.
The second step is to summarize the results. Someone must prepare a
written statement that contains key points of agreement after the retreat or
after each meeting. That task usually falls to an HR professional or to an external
facilitator, who prepares a presentation or handout. However, the CEO
or other top-level decision-makers feed these key points back to the retreat
participants.

136 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
The third and final step is to conduct follow-up activities to ensure agreement.
Follow-up activities may be conducted in several ways. One way is to
hold a follow-up meeting with the participants to surface any points of confusion
or disagreement. This can be done in small groups (at the end of a retreat)
or individually with participants (after the retreat). Another way is to establish
a top-level committee to govern SP&M in the organization and/or at various
levels or locations of the organization.
An interactive debate does focus initial attention on key issues that should
be addressed to formulate a clear program mission statement. That is an advantage
of the approach. But it also requires much time and strong personal
involvement from the CEO and others. That is its chief disadvantage.
Writing Policy and Procedures
Why is the organization undertaking an SP&M program? What results are desired
from it? How can consistent program operations be ensured? Decisionmakers
may answer these questions by preparing written program policy and
procedures.
What Is a Succession Planning and Management Policy, and What Are
Succession Planning and Management Procedures?
Policy is a natural outgrowth of mission. Typically stated in writing, it places
the organization on record as supporting or opposing an approach to action.
Procedures flow from policy and provide guidelines for applying it. Writing a
policy on SP&M clarifies what the organization seeks to do; writing procedures
clarifies how the policy will be applied. Typical components of an SP&M policy
include a mission statement, philosophical statements, and procedures. A sample
SP&M policy appears in Exhibit 6-4.
How Are Policies and Procedures Written?
Succession planning and management policy and procedures should usually
be written only after decision-makers agree on program mission and goals.
Crises, problems, or issues of importance should provide clues about what to
include in the policy and procedures, and they will usually be implicit in the
mission. As decision-makers prepare a mission statement they will typically
consider what may be rightfully included in a written program policy and procedure.
In many cases, the appropriate approach to use in writing policies and
procedures stems from the approach used in preparing the mission statement.
For instance, if an ‘‘Ask and formulate’’ approach was used in formulating
the mission statement, then prepare a draft SP&M policy and procedures to

Starting a Systematic Program
137
Exhibit 6-4. A Sample Succession Planning and Management Policy
Mission Statement
The purpose of the succession planning and management program in [company or
organization name] is to ensure a ready supply of internal talent for key positions at
all times. This organization is fully committed to equal employment opportunity for
all employees, regardless of race, creed, sex, national origin, sexual orientation, or
disability.
Policy and Philosophy
It is the policy of the [company or organization name] to help employees develop to
the full extent of their potential and, to the extent possible for the organization, to
help them achieve realistic career goals that satisfy both individual and organizational
requirements.
This organization is firmly committed to promotion from within, whenever qualified
talent is available, for key positions. This organization is also firmly committed to
helping employees develop their potential so that they are prepared and qualified
to assume positions in line with individual career goals and organizational requirements.
Procedures
At least once each year, the organization will sponsor:
A replacement planning activity that will assess how well the organization is
positioned to meet replacement requirements by promotions or other personnel
movements from within.
Individual performance appraisal to assess how well individuals are meeting
their current job requirements.
Individual potential assessment to assess how well individuals are presently
equipped for future advancement. Unlike performance appraisal—which is
typically focused on past or present performance—the focus of individual
potential assessment will be on the future.
Individual development planning to provide the means for action plans to
help individuals narrow the developmental gap between what they already
know or can do and what they must know or do to qualify for advancement.
The succession planning and management program will rely heavily on the processes
listed above to identify individuals suitable for advancement. The program will
work closely in tandem with an in-house career planning program, which is designed
to help individuals identify their career goals and take proactive steps to
achieve them.

138 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
accompany the proposal submitted to executives. If a ‘‘Recommend and listen’’
approach was chosen, then draft an SP&M policy and procedures to accompany
the mission statement in the initial proposal to management. If the
approach chosen was to ‘‘Facilitate an interactive debate,’’ then committees in
the organization will usually be the means by which to draft policy and procedures,
oversee refinements, and issue updates or modifications to policy and
procedures.
Identifying Target Groups
Who should be the focus of the SP&M program? Should the program be geared
to top-level executive ranks only? Should it encompass other groups, levels, or
parts of the organization? Answering these questions requires decision-makers
to identify target groups.
Most of what has been written about SP&M programs has directed attention
to replacing top-level executive positions. Substantial research has been
conducted on SP&M for the CEO 3 ; other writings have focused on the CEO’s
immediate reports. Relatively little has been written about SP&M for other
groups, though many experts on the subject concede that the need has never
been greater for effective SP&M efforts at lower levels. Indeed, interest in
multiskilled, team-based management and cross-training stems from the recognition
that more time, resources, and attention must be focused on systematically
developing human capabilities at all levels and across all groups.
The results of my 2004 survey on SP&M practices revealed that the respondents’
organizations are not consistently identifying and developing successors.
(See Exhibit 6-5.)
Establishing Initial Targets
Where exactly is the organization weakest in bench strength? The answer to
that question should provide a clue about where to establish initial targets for
the SP&M program. (See the activity in Exhibit 6-6. If necessary, circulate it to
top managers or ask them to complete it in an initial program kickoff meeting
or mission statement retreat.)
Direct attention to three specific areas first, since they are a common
source of problems: successors for top management positions; successors for
first-line supervisory positions; and successors for unique, tough-to-fill technical
or professional positions.
Top management positions are fewest in absolute numbers, but they are
often critically important for formulating and implementing organizational
strategy. They may grow weak in bench strength in organizations that experience
significant employee reductions in the middle management ranks as a
result of forced layoffs, employee buyouts, or early retirement offers.

Starting a Systematic Program
139
Exhibit 6-5. Targeted Groups for Succession Planning and Management
Succession planning may not be carried out with all groups in an organization. For
each group listed below, indicate whether your organization makes a deliberate
effort to identify and develop successors.
Does Your
Does Your
Organization Make a Organization Make a
Deliberate Effort to Deliberate Effort to
Identify Successors in Develop Successors in
This Group?
This Group?
Group (Percentage Response) (Percentage Response)
Yes No Yes No
A Executives 89% 11% 100% 0%
B Middle Managers 67% 33% 56% 44%
C Supervisors 44% 56% 56% 44%
D Professionals 33% 67% 22% 78%
E
Technical Workers
(Engineers, Computer
Specialists) 11% 89% 11% 89%
F Sales Workers 22% 78% 22% 78%
G
H
Clerical and
Secretarial Workers 11% 89% 22% 78%
Hourly Production or
Service Workers 22% 78% 33% 67%
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey
results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).
Supervisory positions are largest in absolute numbers, so continuing turnover
and other personnel movements leave these ranks subject to the greatest
need for replacements. As a port of entry to the management ranks, supervision
is also critically important because many middle managers and executives
start out in the supervisory ranks. Supervisors are often promoted from the
hourly ranks, lacking management experience, or are hired from outside the
organization. They are areas of weakness in organizations that have not
planned management-development programs or that provide little or no
incentive for movement into supervision—such as organizations in which unionized
hourly workers earn substantially more than supervisors, who are ineligible
for overtime pay but must work overtime anyway.

140 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 6-6. An Activity for Identifying Initial Targets for Succession
Planning and Management Activities
Directions: Use this activity to identify initial target groups for the SP&M program in
an organization. For each job category listed in the left column below, list the priority
(1 highest priority) order in the center column. Then, in the right column, briefly
explain why the job category was assigned that level of priority. Circulate this activity
to decision-makers and ask them to complete it. Compile the results and feed them
back to decision-makers to emphasize what job categories were generally perceived
to be the rightful target for the SP&M program. Add paper as necessary. (If appropriate,
modify the list of job categories so they coincide precisely with any special
labels/titles associated with them in the organization.)
List by
Priority Order
Job Category (1 Highest) What Is Your Reasoning?
1. Executives
2. Individuals Preparing
for Executive Positions
3. Middle Managers
4. Individuals Preparing
for Middle Management
5. Supervisors
6. Individuals Preparing
for Supervision
7. Professional Workers
8. Individuals Preparing to
Be Professional
Workers
9. Technical Workers
10. Individuals Preparing to
Become Technical
Workers
11. Sales Workers
12. Individuals Preparing to
Become Sales Workers
13. Clerical Workers

Starting a Systematic Program
141
14. Individuals Preparing to
Become Clerical
Workers
15. Hourly Production or
Service Workers
16. Individuals Preparing to
Become Hourly Production
or Service Workers
17. Other Job Categories
Tough-to-fill technical or professional positions are often limited in number.
Managers may be kept awake at night, tossing and turning, at the mere
thought of losing a member of this group because recruiting or training a
successor on short notice is difficult or nearly impossible. Choose one
group—or all three—as initial targets for the SP&M program if the results of
the activity in Exhibit 6-6 demonstrate the need. Otherwise, use the results of
the activity in Exhibit 6-6 to identify the initial targets for the program. Verify
the groups chosen with decision-makers.
Expanding Succession Planning and Management to Other Groups
Although the organization may have neither the time nor the resources to
establish a systematic SP&M program that encompasses all people and positions,
decision-makers may agree that such a goal is worth achieving eventually.
For that reason, periodically administer Exhibit 6-6 to decision-makers
to assess which groups should be targeted for inclusion and in what priority
order.
Of course, decision-makers may wish to prioritize groups in ways other
than by job category. For instance, they may feel that bench strength is weakest
in any of the following areas:
▲ Geographical Locations
▲ Product or Service Lines
▲ Functions of Organizational Operation
▲ Experience with Specific Industry-Related or Product/Service-Related
Problems
▲ Experience with International Markets
Ask decision-makers about where they perceive the organization to be weak
in bench strength. Then target the SP&M program initially to improve bench

142 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
strength at that level. While continuing efforts at that level, gradually extend
the effort to include other groups.
Clarifying the Roles of the CEO, Senior Managers, and
Others
What roles should be played in the SP&M program by the CEO, senior managers,
the HR program, individuals, and other groups?
The Roles of the CEO and Other Senior Managers
As noted in Chapter 5, the CEO’s role in the success of an effective SP&M
program is a make-or-break proposition. If he or she is willing to provide
hands-on involvement, the program begins with an excellent chance of success.
On the other hand, if he or she classifies SP&M as something that everyone
else should do, then the program begins with the hallmarks of a disaster
in the making. This is because only the CEO can hold other senior executives
accountable for grooming talent, and only he or she can reward or punish
them for their results. The VP of HR cannot do that.
An excellent starting point is to sit down with the CEO and ask, ‘‘What role
do you want to play in SP&M, and why do you want to play that role?’’ It also
helps to ask, ‘‘What results do you want to see from the SP&M program, and
what role do you think you should play in helping to achieve those results?’’
From the answers to that, HR staff or others may prepare a role description of
what part the CEO wants to play. The same approach may be used with other
senior managers. By clarifying expected roles—and the actions associated with
them—accountability is being established.
The Role of the HR Department
What should be the role of the HR department in the SP&M effort? The reality
is that many roles are possible. And if the role of HR is not clarified, it can
wreak havoc on the effort as expectations clash with realities.
In most organizations, including best-practice firms, HR’s role is a coordinative
one. While that term coordinative may be a mouthful, it basically means
that: (1) someone within HR is given responsibility for collecting information
and following up to gather information for the SP&M effort; (2) the HR function
must supply the technology to support data gathering about individuals,
organizational needs, present and future competencies, present performance
and future potential, individual development plans, competency development
strategies, and so on.
A common problem in starting SP&M programs is that HR has no staff
available, or at least staff with sufficient credibility, to assign. Another problem

Starting a Systematic Program
143
is that the HR function is lacking in what might be called the infrastructure to
support a succession program. Infrastructure means that nothing exists to
support the succession effort—no technology, no competency models, no
working performance management systems, no 360-degree assessment tools
(or other methods of assessing potential), no individual development plans
(IDPs), or anything else that will be needed for a good effort.
There is no simple solution to this problem. Someone must be assigned
the responsibility—someone who is an exemplary performer in HR, perhaps
even a HiPo, since that person must have credibility with the CEO, senior
managers, and even board of director members. That HR person must then
receive training on succession. While many HR people end up self-taught on
this topic, it is still helpful to send the assigned person to whatever training
might be available on succession.
TheRoleofIndividuals
Of course, other useful questions to ask—and ones that are too often lost in
the shuffle of thinking about getting the SP&M program up and rolling—are
these: ‘‘What role(s) should individuals play in developing themselves for the
future?’’ and ‘‘How do we discover what career goals people have set for themselves
for the future?’’ It should not be assumed, of course, that everyone
wants to be promoted. Some people look at what their bosses go through and
say ‘‘No, thanks.’’ Decision-makers must learn sensitivity to the desire for
work-life balance, a topic of growing interest. Career planning programs can,
of course, be most helpfully integrated with SP&M programs in this respect.
The Roles of Other Stakeholders
The board of directors may want to play a role in the organization’s succession
effort. If so, board members must be asked what role they want to play. Perhaps
even a board committee will be established to oversee succession. That
is a recommended approach because it focuses the attention of the CEO and
other senior leaders on the issue, ensuring accountability. And it also helps to
protect shareholder interests, at least in companies where stocks are traded,
against the devastating impact on the company that can result from the sudden
loss of key people such as the CEO or other senior leaders. 4
Setting Program Priorities
Much work needs to be done to establish a systematic SP&M program. But
rarely, if ever, can it be accomplished all at once. Someone has to set program
priorities, both short term and long term. That may be done by top-level deci-

144 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
sion-makers, a full-time or part-time SP&M coordinator, or a committee representing
different groups or functions within the organization.
Initial priorities should be set to address the organization’s most pressing
problems—and to rectify the most serious weaknesses in bench strength. Subsequent
priorities should be set to reflect a long-term plan for systematic
SP&M in the organization.
In addition to the activities already described in this chapter—such as
clarifying roles, formulating a mission statement, writing a program policy,
clarifying program procedures, and identifying the program’s targeted
groups—other actions will have to be undertaken. Priorities should be established
on what actions to take—and when—depending on the organization’s
needs. These activities include:
▲ Preparing an action plan to guide program start-up
▲ Communicating the action plan
▲ Training managers and employees for their roles in the systematic
SP&M program
▲ Organizing kickoff meetings and periodic briefing meetings to discuss
the program
▲ Counseling managers on handling unique succession planning problems,
such as dealing with poor performers, managing high performers,
grooming and coaching high-potentials, addressing the special problems
of plateaued workers, and managing workplace diversity
▲ Defining present and future work requirements, processes, activities,
responsibilities, success factors, and competence
▲ Appraising present individual performance
▲ Assessing future individual potential
▲ Providing individuals with the means by which to carry out career planning
within the organization
▲ Tracking performance and potential
▲ Preparing and following through on individual development plans
(IDPs) to help close gaps between what people know or do and what
they must know or do in the future to qualify for advancement and
ensure leadership continuity
▲ Tracking innovative efforts to meet replacement needs
▲ Establishing effective approaches to evaluating the benefits of systematic
SP&M
▲ Designing and implementing programs geared to special groups (such
as high-potentials, plateaued workers, high performers, or low performers)
or to meet special needs (such as reducing voluntary turnover of
key employees after downsizing, handling cultural diversity, using suc-

Starting a Systematic Program
145
cession planning in autonomous work teams, and integrating SP&M
with such other organizational initiatives as quality or customer service)
Depending on an organization’s unique needs, however, some issues may demand
immediate attention—and action.
Take this opportunity to consider program priorities in the organization.
Use the activity that appears in Exhibit 6-7 to establish initial program priorities
in the organization. (If you are the coordinator of the SP&M program, you may
choose to circulate the activity to key decision-makers for their reactions, feed
back the results to them, and use their reactions as a starting point for setting
program priorities. Alternatively, share the activity with a standing committee
on SP&M established in the organization, if one exists. Ask committee members
to complete the activity and then use the results as a basis for setting
initial program priorities.) Revisit the priorities at least annually. Gear action
plans according to the program priorities that are established.
Addressing the Legal Framework
Legal issues should not be forgotten in SP&M. That is especially true because
employee complaints filed with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
have been on the increase in recent years. Those responsible for formulating
and implementing an SP&M program should familiarize themselves with
government laws, rules, regulations, and other provisions—both in the United
States and, if they do business internationally, in other nations as appropriate.
Competent legal advice should be sought when the organization’s decisionmakers
have reached agreement on the goals and objectives of the SP&M program.
Additionally, employers should take special care to avoid real or perceived
employment discrimination of all kinds. Private-sector employers
should also take care to ensure that SP&M programs are consistent with company
human resource policies and procedures as described in company documents
(such as employee handbooks or policy and procedure manuals).
Public-sector employers falling under state or federal civil service rules should
double-check their program descriptions to ensure that SP&M programs are
consistent with policies and procedures governing hiring, promotion, training,
and other policies.
A complex web of employment law exists at the federal government level
in the United States. Key national employment laws are summarized in Exhibit
6-8. Under the supremacy clause of the U.S. Constitution, federal laws take
precedence over local laws unless no federal law exists or federal law specifically
stipulates that local laws may be substituted for federal law. In addition
to national labor laws, each state, county, and municipality may enact and
enforce special laws, rules, regulations, or ordinances affecting employment
in a local jurisdiction. The latter may influence succession planning and management
practices.

146 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 6-7. An Activity for Establishing Program Priorities in Succession
Planning and Management
Directions: Use this activity to help establish priorities for the succession planning
program in an organization. For each activity listed in the left column below, set a
priority by circling a number for it in the right column. Use the following scale:
1 A top priority that should be acted on now
2 A secondary priority that is important but that can wait awhile for action
3 A tertiary priority that should only be acted on after items prioritized as 1
or 2 have received attention
Circulate this activity among decision-makers as appropriate. If you do so, compile
their responses and then feed them back as a catalyst for subsequent decision making.
Add paper as necessary. (You may also wish to add other activities of interest.)
Priority
Top Secondary Tertiary
Activity 1 2 3
1. Preparing an Action Plan to Guide Program
Start-Up 1 2 3
2. Communicating the Action Plan 1 2 3
3. Training Managers and Employees for
Their Roles in the Systematic Succession
Planning Program 1 2 3
4. Organizing Kickoff Meetings and Periodic
Briefing Meetings to Discuss the Program 1 2 3
5. Counseling Managers on Handling Unique
Succession Planning Problems 1 2 3
6. Defining Present and Future Work Requirements,
Processes, Activities, Responsibilities,
Success Factors, and Competencies 1 2 3
7. Appraising Present Individual Performance 1 2 3
8. Assessing Future Individual Potential 1 2 3
9. Providing Individuals with the Means by
Which to Carry Out Career Planning
Within the Organization 1 2 3

Starting a Systematic Program
147
10. Tracking Performance and Potential 1 2 3
11. Preparing, and Following Through on, Individual
Development Plans (IDPs) 1 2 3
12. Using, and Tracking, Innovative Efforts to
meet Replacement Needs 1 2 3
13. Establishing Effective Approaches to Evaluating
the Benefits of Systematic Succession
Planning 1 2 3
14. Designing and Implementing Programs
Geared to Meeting Special Needs 1 2 3
15. Other (specify) 1 2 3
Of special importance to SP&M programs is the Uniform Guidelines on
Employee Selection Procedures. Private-sector employers must ensure that all
employment decisions are in compliance with these procedures. If they do not
do so, they may risk a grievance under the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission or a ‘‘right to sue’’ letter when mediation efforts with the EEOC
fail. Public-sector employers may find themselves falling under different standards
established by the applicable branch of government.
Establishing Strategies for Rolling Out the Program
As an increasing number of employers begin to implement SP&M programs,
they face dilemmas in how to roll them out. That is a frequent issue for consultants
specializing in this area. I advise my clients to start at the top, with the
CEO. The CEO is the real ‘‘customer’’ who must be satisfied, and it is wise to
‘‘follow the generations’’ in a roll-out strategy. That means it is best to begin
with the CEO and select his or her immediate successors first—a simple replacement
strategy. The CEO and his immediate reports—that is, the senior
executive team—should be next. That, too, is a simple replacement plan. However,
as internal consultants from human resources or external consultants
work with the senior executive team, they begin to understand what issues are
important in such a program and experience it firsthand. Their involvement
and participation ensures their ownership and understanding. Next, middle
managers are included. That is a third-generation plan. As middle managers
are included, the program formulated by the senior executives is fire-tested
with middle managers. That sets the stage for the talent pools and skill inventories
that characterize generation-four and generation-five plans.
Of particular importance is the communication strategy. That is often an
issue that should be addressed separately from the action plan. The CEO and
senior executives should pay careful attention to how the SP&M programs are
(text continues on page 154

148 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 6-8. U.S. Labor Laws
Name of Law
and Date of
Enactment Legal Citation Brief Description of Key Provisions
Davis-Bacon 40 U.S.C. and The Davis-Bacon Act applies to federal con-
Act (1931) sect; 276 et struction and repair contracts over $2,000.
seq.
The Act requires contractors to pay their employees
a specified minimum wage determined
by the Secretary of Labor to be
prevailing for similar work in that geographic
area. Over 60 other federal laws make compliance
with Davis-Bacon provisions a precondition
for state and local contracts when a
portion of the funding for those contracts
comes from the federal government. The Act is
enforced by the Wage and Hour division of the
Department of Labor.
The National 29 U.S.C. and The National Labor Relations Act protects the
Labor Relations sect; 151 right of employees to choose whether to be
Act (Wagner
represented by a union. The Act protects
Act and Taft-
against coercion by employers or unions in
Hartley Act)
making this choice and establishes the ground
(1947) rules for union representation elections. The
Act establishes collective bargaining between
employers and unions. The Act is enforced by
the National Labor Relations Board.
Fair Labor Stan- 29 U.S.C. and The Fair Labor Standards Act provides minidards
Act sect; 201 et seq mum wage and overtime requirements. Under
(1938) the FLSA all nonexempt employees are entitled
to cash overtime for all hours worked over 40
in a workweek. The Act is enforced by the
Wage and Hour Division of the Department of
Labor and private lawsuits.
Labor- 29 U.S.C. and The Labor-Management Reporting and Dis-
Management sect; 401 et seq closure Act, or the Landrum-Griffin Act, estab-
Reporting and
lishes a set of rights for employees who are
Disclosure Act
members of unions. They include the right to
(Landrum-
vote, attend meetings, meet and assemble with
Griffin Act)
other members, and freely express views and
(1959) opinions. The Act also requires all labor
unions to adopt a constitution and bylaws, and

Starting a Systematic Program
149
contains certain reporting requirements for
labor organizations, their officers, and employees.
This Act is enforced by the Office of
Labor Management Standards of the Department
of Labor.
Contract Work 40 U.S.C. and This Act sets a standard 40-hour workweek for
Hours Safety sect; 327 et seq employees of federal contractors and regu-
Standards Act
lates work in excess of the standard week in-
(1962) cluding the requirement to pay overtime. The
Act is enforced by the Wage and Hour Division
of the Department of Labor.
Equal Pay Act 29 U.S.C. and The Equal Pay Act prohibits discrimination in
(1963) sect; 201 et seq pay and benefits on the basis of sex for jobs in
the same establishment that require equal skill,
effort, and responsibility and which are performed
under similar working conditions. The
Act is enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission.
Title VII of the 42 U.S.C. and Title VII makes it unlawful for an employer with
Civil Rights Act sect; 2000 et 15 or more employees to discriminate against
(1964) seq. individuals with respect to hiring, compensation,
terms, conditions, and privileges of employment
on the basis of race, color, religion,
national origin, or sex. Title VII is enforced by
the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Executive 42 U.S.C.A. Executive Order 11246 prohibits job discrimi-
Order 11246 and sect; nation by employers holding Federal contracts
(1965) 2000e or subcontracts on the basis of race, color, sex,
national origin, or religion and requires affirmative
action to ensure equality of opportunity
in all aspects of employment. The Order is
enforced by the Office of Federal Compliance
Contract Programs of the Department of
Labor.
Service Con- 41 U.S.C. and This Act is analogous to the Davis-Bacon Act
tract Act (1965) sect; 351 et in the area of service contracts performed by
seq.
private companies doing work for the federal
government. The Act requires contractors that
provide services to the federal government to
provide their employees a specified minimum
(continues)

150 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 6-8. (continued)
Name of Law
and Date of
Enactment Legal Citation Brief Description of Key Provisions
wage and fringe benefits plan determined by
the Secretary of Labor to be prevailing in the
locality. The Act is enforced by the Wage and
Hour Division of the Department of Labor.
Age Discrimi- 29 U.S.C. and The Age Discrimination in Employment Act, or
nation in Em- sect; 621 et ADEA, makes it unlawful for an employer with
ployment Act seq. 20 or more employees to discriminate against
(1967) individuals that are 40 years or older, with respect
to hiring, compensation, terms, conditions,
and privileges of employment on the
basis of age. The Act is enforced by the Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission.
Federal Coal 30 U.S.C. and This Act empowers the Secretaries of Labor
Mine Health sect; 801 et and Health and Human Services to promuland
Safety Act seq. gate health and safety standards for the mining
(1969) industry. The Act is enforced by the Mine Safety
and Health Administration of the Department
of Labor.
Occupational 29 U.S.C. and The Occupational Safety and Health Act, or
Safety and sect; 553, 651 OSHA, requires all employers to provide a
Health Act et seq. workplace that is free from recognized hazards
(1970) that cause, or are likely to cause, death or serious
physical harm to employees. The Act also
establishes the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration, which is responsible for
promulgating workplace safety standards and
regulations for various industries. The Act is
enforced by the Occupational Safety and
Health Administration.
Rehabilitation 29 U.S.C. and The Rehabilitation Act prohibits employers that
Act (1973) sect; 701 et receive federal grants, loans, or contracts from
seq.
discriminating in their employment practices
against individuals with disabilities. The Act is
enforced by the Department of Labor.

Starting a Systematic Program
151
Employee 29 U.S.C. and The Employment Retirement Income Security
Retirement In- sect; 301, Act, or ERISA, governs the operation of pencome
Security 1001 et seq. sions and retirement benefits provided by pri-
Act (1974)
vate-sector employers to their employees. The
Act does not require that employers provide
such benefits, but regulates the conduct of employers
that do provide such plans. The Act is
enforced by the Pension and Welfare Benefits
Administration of the Department of Labor.
Vietnam Era 38 U.S.C. and VEVRAA makes it unlawful for employers to
Veterans’ sect; 4301 discriminate against veterans of the Armed
Readjustment
Forces in their employment practices. It also
Assistance Act
provides veterans with certain reemployment,
(1974) seniority, health benefits, and pension rights
with respect to prior employment. The Act is
enforced by the Office of Veterans Employment
and Training of the Department of Labor.
Black Lung 30 U.S.C. and This Act provides benefits to coal miners who
Benefits Reform sect; 901 et are totally disabled due to pneumoconiosis
Act (1977) seq. and to the surviving dependents of miners
whose death was a result of this disease. The
Act is enforced by the Office of Workers’ Compensation
Programs of the Department of
Labor.
Labor- 29 U.S.C.A. The Labor-Management Cooperation Act en-
Management and sect; 141 courages the establishment and operation of
Cooperation note, 173, joint labor-management activities designed to
Act (1978) 175a. improve labor relations, job security, and organizational
effectiveness. The Act authorizes
the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service
to provide assistance, contracts, and
grants to joint labor-management committees
that promote these purposes.
Pregnancy Dis- 42 U.S.C. and The PDA, a 1978 amendment to Title VII of the
crimination Act sect; 2000 et 1964 Civil Rights Act, makes it unlawful for an
(1978) seq. employer to discriminate on the basis of pregnancy
or childbirth. The Act is enforced by the
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
(continues)

152 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 6-8. (continued)
Name of Law
and Date of
Enactment Legal Citation Brief Description of Key Provisions
Multi-Employer 29 U.S.C. and This Act regulates the operation of multi-
Pension Plan sect; 1001a et employer pension plans and provides protec-
Amendments seq. tion and guarantees for the participants and
Act (1980)
beneficiaries of distressed plans. The Act is enforced
by the Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration
of the Department of Labor.
Job Training 29 U.S.C. and This Act creates Private Industry Councils com-
Partnership Act sect; 1501 et posed of business owners and executives as
(1982) seq. well as representatives of organized labor to
assist state and local governments in the development
and oversight of job training programs.
The Act is enforced by the Employment
and Training Administration of the Department
of Labor.
Migrant and 29 U.S.C. and This Act governs the terms and conditions of
Seasonal sect; 1801 et employment for migrant and seasonal agricul-
Agricultural seq. tural workers and regulates the employment
Protection Act
practices of agricultural employers, agricul-
(1983) tural associations, and farm labor contractors.
The Act is enforced by the Wage and Hour Division
of the Department of Labor and by private
lawsuits.
Immigration 29 U.S.C. and The Immigration Reform and Control Act, or
Reform and sect; 1802 et IRCA, requires employers to verify that appli-
Control Act seq. cants for employment are authorized to work
(1986) in the United States. The Act provides civil and
criminal penalties for knowingly employing unauthorized
aliens and also prohibits discrimination
based on national origin or citizenship
if the alien is authorized to work. The Act is
enforced by the Department of Justice and the
Immigration and Naturalization Service.

Starting a Systematic Program
153
Economic Dis- 29 U.S.C. and This Act provides federal funds to the states for
location and sect; 1651–53 basic readjustment and retraining of workers
Worker Adjust-
who have been terminated because of layoffs
ment Assistance
or plant closures and who are unlikely to return
Act (1988)
to their previous occupations. The Act is managed
by the Employment Standards Administration
of the Department of Labor.
Employee Poly- 29 U.S.C. and This Act makes it unlawful for an employer to
graph Protec- sect; 2001 et require, request, suggest, or cause an emtion
Act (1988) seq. ployee or applicant to submit to a lie detector
test. In addition, it prohibits the employer from
threatening or taking any adverse employment
action against an employee or applicant who
refuses to take a lie detector test. The Act is
enforced by a private right of action in the federal
district courts.
Worker Adjust- 29 U.S.C. and The Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notifiment
and sect; 2101et cation Act, or WARN, requires employers with
Retraining No- seq. 100 or more employees to give 60 days adtification
Act
vance notice to employees of impending plant
(1988) closings or layoffs involving 50 or more employees.
The Act is enforced by private lawsuits.
Whistleblower 10 U.S.C. and The Whistleblower Protection statutes protect
Protection sect; 2409; 12 employees of financial institutions and govern-
Statutes (1989) U.S.C.; 1831j; ment contractors from discriminatory and re-
31 U.S.C. and taliatory employment actions as a result of
5328; 41 reporting violations of the law to federal au-
U.S.C. 265. thorities. The Act is enforced by the Wage and
Hour Division of the Department of Labor.
Americans with 42 U.S.C. and The Americans with Disabilities Act, or ADA,
Disabilities Act sect; 12101 et makes it unlawful for an employer with 15 or
(1990) seq. more employees to discriminate against qualified
individuals with disabilities with respect to
hiring, compensation, terms, conditions, and
privileges of employment. The Act is enforced
by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
(continues)

154 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 6-8. (continued)
Name of Law
and Date of
Enactment Legal Citation Brief Description of Key Provisions
Older Workers 29 U.S.C. and This amendment to the Age Discrimination in
Benefit Protec- sect; 623 et Employment Act makes it unlawful for an emtion
Act (1990) seq. ployer to discriminate with respect to employee
benefits on the basis of age. It also regulates
early retirement incentive programs. The Act is
enforced by the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission.
Civil Rights Act 42 U.S.C. and The Civil Rights Act of 1991 amended the
(1991) sect; 1981 et 1964 act, and the Americans with Disabilities
seq.
Act (ADA), to allow compensatory and punitive
damages, but places caps on the amounts that
can be awarded. The Act also provides for jury
trials in suits brought under these laws.
Family and 29 U.S.C. and The Family and Medical Leave Act, or FMLA,
Medical Leave sect; 2601 et requires that employers with 50 or more em-
Act (1991) seq. ployees provide up to 12 weeks of unpaid
leave, within any 12-month period, to employees
for the care of a newborn or adopted
child, for the care of a seriously ill family member,
or for treatment and care of the employee’s
own serious medical condition. The Act is
enforced by the Wage and Hour Division of
the Department of Labor.
Congressional 2 U.S.C. and When many of the above laws were enacted,
Accountability sect; 1301 et Congress was expressly exempted from com-
Act (1995) seq. pliance. The Congressional Accountability Act
extends coverage of eleven laws to Congress
in its capacity as an employer.
Source: Originally downloaded from Labor Policy Association. (1997). U.S. Employment Laws. Website: http/www.lpa.org/lpa/
laws.html. Washington, D.C.: Labor Policy Association. See also http://www.dol.gov/asp/programs/guide.htm.
described to middle managers and other stakeholders. If they do not give special
attention to the communication strategy, so as to make the business goals
and the policies and procedures clear, they risk broad-scale failure of the plan.
Human resource practitioners cannot do it all. They need to work with the
CEO and senior executive team—and sometimes with external consultants as
well—to craft a communication strategy that explains how the SP&M program
works and why it exists.

Starting a Systematic Program
155
Summary
Starting up a systematic SP&M program usually requires an organization’s decision-makers
to:
▲ Conduct a risk analysis and build a commitment to change.
▲ Clarify the desired program roles of management, employees, facilitators,
and participants.
▲ Prepare a program mission statement.
▲ Write a program policy and procedures.
▲ Identify groups targeted for program action, both initially and subsequently.
▲ Clarify the roles of the CEO, senior managers, and others.
▲ Establish program priorities.
▲ Address the legal framework in succession planning and management.
▲ Plan strategies for rolling out a succession planning and management
program.
The next steps in starting the program are covered in the following chapter.
They include preparing a program action plan, communicating it, training
management and employees for enacting their roles in the program, and conducting
program kickoff meetings, program briefing sessions, and counseling
periods.

C H A P T E R 7
REFINING THE PROGRAM
Beyond startup, some additional steps will usually need to be taken before a
systematic succession planning and management (SP&M) program becomes
operational. These steps include:
▲ Preparing a program action plan
▲ Communicating the action plan
▲ Conducting SP&M meetings
▲ Training on SP&M
▲ Counseling managers to deal with SP&M issues uniquely affecting them
and their work areas
This chapter briefly reviews each topic listed above, providing tips for effectively
refining an SP&M program in its early stages.
Preparing a Program Action Plan
Setting initial program priorities is only a beginning. Turning priorities into
realities requires dedication, hard work, and effective strategy. Preparing a
program action plan helps conceptualize the strategy for implementing systematic
SP&M in the organization.
An action plan activates and energizes an SP&M program. It is a natural
next step after setting program priorities because it indicates how they will be
met.
Components of an Effective Action Plan
An action plan is akin to a project plan. It answers all the journalistic questions:
▲ Who should take action?
▲ What action should they take?
▲ When should the action be taken?
156

Refining the Program
157
▲ Where should the action be taken?
▲ Why should the action be taken?
▲ How should action be taken?
In this way, an action plan provides a basis for program accountability.
HowtoEstablishtheActionPlan
Take several steps when establishing an action plan. First, list priorities. Second,
indicate what actions must be taken to achieve each priority. Third, assign
responsibility for each action. Fourth, indicate where the actions must be performed.
Fifth and finally, assign deadlines or time indicators to indicate when
the actions should be completed—or when each stage of completion should
be reached. The result of these steps should be a concrete action plan to guide
the SP&M program. (Fill in the worksheet appearing in Exhibit 7-1 to clarify
the program action plan.)
Communicating the Action Plan
Few results will be achieved if an action plan is established and then kept
secret. Some effort must be made to communicate the action plan to those
affected by it and to those expected to take responsibility for participating in
its implementation.
Problems in Communicating
Communicating about an SP&M program presents unique problems that are
rarely encountered in other areas of organizational operations. The reason:
many top managers are hesitant to share information about their programs
widely inside or outside their organizations. They are reluctant to share information
outside the organization for fear that succession plans will reveal too
much about the organization’s strategy. If an SP&M program is closely linked
to, and supportive of, strategic plans—and that is desirable—then revealing
information about it may tip off canny competitors to what the organization
intends to do.
They are reluctant to share information inside the organization for fear
that it will lead to negative consequences. High-performing or high-potential
employees who are aware that they are designated successors for key positions
may:
▲ Become complacent because they think advancement is guaranteed.
This is called the crown prince phenomenon.

158 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 7-1. A Worksheet for Preparing an Action Plan to Establish the
Succession Planning and Management Program
Directions: Use this worksheet to help you formulate an action plan to guide the
start-up of an SP&M program in your organization. In column 1, list program priorities
(what must be done first, second, third, and so on?) and provide a rationale (why
are these priorities?). In column 2, list what tasks must be carried out to transform
priorities into realities (how will priorities be achieved?). In column 3, assign responsibility
for each task. In column 4, indicate (if applicable) special locations (where
must the tasks be accomplished or the priorities achieved?). In column 5, assign
deadlines or time indicators.
Circulate this worksheet among decision-makers—especially top-level managers
who are participating on an SP&M committee. Ask each decision-maker to complete
the worksheet individually. Then compile their responses, feed them back, and meet
to achieve consensus on this detailed action plan. Add paper and/or priorities as
necessary.
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3 Column 4 Column 5
Program
Deadlines/
Priorities
Time
and Rationale Tasks Responsibility Location(s) Indicators
(By when (How will pri- (Who is re- (Where must (Assign deadshould
each orities be sponsible for tasks be ac- lines or time
task be com- achieved?) each task?) complished, indicators.)
pleted? What
if that is apmust
be done
plicable?)
in order of
importance,
and why are
these priorities?)
▲ Grow disenchanted if organizational conditions change and their status
as successors is no longer assured.
▲ ‘‘Hold themselves for ransom’’ by threatening to leave unless they receive
escalating raises or advancement opportunities.
Of course, the opposite can also happen. If high potentials are kept unaware
of their status, they may seek advancement opportunities elsewhere. Equally

Refining the Program
159
bad, good performers who are not presently identified as successors for key
positions may grow disenchanted and demotivated, even though they may
already be demonstrating that they have that potential. A poorly handled communication
strategy can lead to increases in avoidable or critical turnover,
thereby costing the organization precious talent and driving up training costs.
Choosing Effective Approaches
As part of the SP&M program, decision-makers should review how the organization
has historically communicated about succession issues—and consider
how it should communicate about them. Establishing a consistent communication
strategy is vital.
Valuable clues about the organization’s historical communication strategy
may be found in how key job incumbents were treated previously and how
wage and salary matters are handled. If key job incumbents did not know that
they were designated successors before they were eligible for advancement or
if the organization’s practice is not to publish salary schedules, then it is likely
that a ‘‘closed’’ communication strategy is preferred. That means information
is kept secret, and successors are not alerted to their status. On the other
hand, if key job incumbents did know that they were designated successors
before they were promoted or if salary schedules are published, then an
‘‘open’’ communication strategy is preferred. That means people are treated
with candor.
Choose an approach to communication based on the preferences of decision-makers.
If their preferences seem unclear, ask questions to discover what
they are:
▲ How, if at all, should employees be informed about the SP&M program?
(For instance, should the mission statement and/or policy and procedures
on SP&M be circulated?)
▲ How should the organization characterize the roles of employee performance
appraisal, individual potential assessment, and individual development
planning in SP&M?
▲ How should decisions about individual selection, promotion, demotion,
transfer, or development in place be explained to those who ask?
▲ What problems will result from informing individuals about their status
in succession plans? From not informing them?
▲ What problems will result from informing employees about the SP&M
program? What problems will result from not informing them?
Ultimately, the organization should choose a communication policy that is
consistent with the answers to the questions above. Often the best approach
is to communicate openly about the SP&M program in general, but conceal
the basis for individual personnel actions in line with good business practice

160 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
and individual privacy laws. Individuals should be encouraged to develop
themselves for the future, but should understand, at the same time, that nothing
is being ‘‘promised’’; rather, qualifying is a first step but does not, in itself,
guarantee advancement.
Conducting Succession Planning and Management
Meetings
It is a rare organization that does not need at least one meeting to lay the
foundation for a systematic SP&M program. Often, four meetings are necessary
during startup: one of top decision-makers to verify the need for the program;
a second, larger meeting to seek input from major stakeholders; a third,
smaller committee meeting of change champions to hammer out a proposal
to guide program startup; and a fourth meeting to introduce the program and
reinforce its importance to management employees who will play critical roles
in cultivating, nurturing, coaching, and preparing the leaders of the future at
all levels. Later, periodic meetings are necessary to review program progress
and ensure continuous improvement.
Meeting 1: Verifying the Need
In the first meeting, a handpicked group—usually limited to the ‘‘top of the
house’’—meets to verify that a genuine need exists to make SP&M a more
systematic process. In this meeting it is common to review current practices
and problems that stem from an informal approach to SP&M. This meeting
usually stems directly from a crisis or from the request of one who wants to
introduce a new way to carry out SP&M.
Meeting 2: Seeking Input
In the second meeting, a larger group of key decision-makers is usually assembled
to surface SP&M problems and to galvanize action. This meeting may take
the form of an executive retreat. Executives should properly be involved in the
program formulation process, since—regardless of the initial targeted group
for the SP&M program and its initial priorities—such a program has important
strategic implications for the organization. Despite recent moves to involve
employees in organizational decision making, it has long been held that executives
have the chief responsibility for organizational strategy formulation. That
is borne out by numerous research studies of executive roles. 1 It is also consistent
with the commonsense view that someone must assume leadership when
beginning new initiatives. 2
Planning an executive retreat focused on SP&M should usually be a joint
undertaking of the CEO and a designated coordinator for the SP&M program.

Refining the Program
161
(The coordinator may be the vice president of personnel or human resources,
a high-level staff generalist from the HR function, the training director, an OD
director, or a management development director.) A designated coordinator
is needed because busy CEOs, while they should maintain active personal
involvement in the SP&M program if it is to work, will seldom have the necessary
time to oversee daily program operations. That responsibility should be
assigned to someone or it will be lost in the shuffle of daily work responsibilities.
Hence, naming a program coordinator is usually an advisable choice.
While a designated coordinator may be selected from a high level of the
line (operating) management ranks—and that will be a necessity in small organizations
not having an HR function—the individual chosen for this responsibility
should have a strong commitment to SP&M, considerable knowledge
about the organization’s HR policies and procedures as well as applicable HR
laws, expertise in state-of-the-art management and leadership development
and human resource development practices, in-depth knowledge about the
organization’s culture, and credibility with all levels of the organization’s management.
(It doesn’t hurt, either, if the individual chosen for this role is perceived
to be a high-potential in his or her own right.)
The CEO and the SP&M coordinator should meet to hammer out an action
plan for the executive retreat focused on collecting input. The retreat should
be held soon after the CEO announces the need for a systematic SP&M program
and names a program coordinator. Invitations should be extended to the
CEO’s immediate reports. The retreat should usually be held off-site, at a quiet
and secluded location, to minimize interruptions. The focus of the retreat
should usually be on:
▲ Explaining the need for a more systematic approach to SP&M
▲ Formulating a (draft) program mission statement
▲ Identifying initial target groups to be served by the program
▲ Setting initial program priorities
An executive retreat is worthwhile because it engages the attention—and
involvement—of key players in the organization’s strategic planning activities,
thereby creating a natural bridge between SP&M and strategic planning. The
retreat’s agenda should reflect the desired outcomes. Presentations may be
made by the CEO, the SP&M coordinator, and the vice president of HR. Outsiders
may be invited to share information about SP&M—including testimonials
about succession programs in other organizations, war stories about the problems
that can result when SP&M is ignored, and descriptions of state-of-the-art
SP&M practices. An important component of any retreat should be small-group
activities geared to surfacing problems and achieving consensus. (Many of the
activities and worksheets provided in this book can be adapted for that purpose,
and the CD-ROM accompanying this book contains a briefing on succes-

162 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
sion suitable for such a meeting.) In many cases, a retreat will end when the
CEO appoints a standing committee to work with the succession planning
coordinator to report back with a detailed program proposal.
In some organizations, the CEO or the SP&M coordinator may prefer that
the retreat be facilitated by third-party consultants. That is desirable if the consultants
can be located and if they possess considerable expertise in SP&M
and in group facilitation. It is also desirable if the CEO feels that third-party
consultants will increase the credibility and emphasize the importance of the
program.
Meeting 3: Hammering Out a Proposal
A standing SP&M committee should be established to continue the program
formulation process begun in the executive retreat. A committee format is
really the best approach to (1) maintain high-level commitment and support,
(2) conserve the time required to review the fruits of the committee’s investigations,
and (3) provide a means for senior-level involvement in SP&M. The
SP&M coordinator should be automatically named a committee member,
though not necessarily committee chair. If the CEO can be personally involved—and
that is highly desirable—he or she should be the chair. Committee
members should be chosen for their interest in SP&M, their track records
of exemplary performance, their proven ability to develop people, and their
keen insight into organizational culture.
In most organizations, a committee of this kind should meet frequently
and regularly during program startup. Initial meetings should focus on investigating
organizational SP&M needs, benchmarking practices in other organizations,
and drafting a detailed proposal to guide the SP&M program.
Meeting 4: The Kickoff Meeting
In the fourth meeting, the program is introduced to those previously involved
in the second meeting and any others, as appropriate. This is typically called a
kickoff meeting.
In most cases, this meeting should focus on program details—and the part
that the meeting participants should play to ensure program success. In short,
a kickoff meeting should seek answers to two questions: (1) What is the
SP&M program in the organization? and (2) What do the participants need to
do to make the program successful?
When organizing a kickoff meeting, pay attention to the following questions:
1. Who will be invited?
2. What exactly should participants know or be able to do upon leaving
the meeting?

Refining the Program
163
3. When should the kickoff meeting be held? For instance, would timing
it to follow a strategic planning retreat be desirable?
4. Where should the kickoff meeting be held? If maximum secrecy is desired,
an off-site location is wise.
5. Why is the meeting being held? If the aim is to reinforce the importance
of this new effort, then the CEO should usually be the keynote presenter.
6. How will the meeting be conducted?
Specific training on program details can then be offered later on establishing
work requirements, appraising present individual performance, assessing future
individual potential, establishing career goals, establishing individual development
plans (IDPs), and using training, education, and development to
help meet succession needs.
Meeting 5: Periodic Review Meetings
Conduct periodic review meetings after the succession planning program has
been established. These meetings should focus on such issues as:
▲ The linkage between SP&M and organizational strategic plans (that may
be handled during strategic planning retreats)
▲ The progress made in the SP&M program
▲ Any need for revisions to the program’s mission statement, governing
policy and procedures, target groups, priorities, action plans, communication
strategies, and training relevant to the succession planning program
▲ The status of succession issues in each organizational component, including
periodic meetings between the CEO and senior executives
The last of these should be familiar to executives in most major corporations.
Once a quarter, senior executives from each part of the corporation
meet with the CEO and a top-level committee to review the status of SP&M in
that part of the corporation. Common topics in such meetings include: (1)
reviewing employee performance; (2) identifying and discussing high potentials;
(3) discussing progress made on individual development plans; and (4)
addressing critical strengths and weaknesses having to do with individual development.
Such meetings serve to keep the SP&M program on target and to
emphasize its importance to senior executives, who should be held accountable
for ‘‘people development’’ as much as for ‘‘market development’’ or ‘‘financial
development.’’

164 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Training on Succession Planning and Management
Implementing a systematic approach to SP&M requires new knowledge and
skills from those expected to cultivate the organization’s internal talent. Some
means must be found to train them so that they are the most efficient and
effective in their new role.
Matching Training to Program Planning
Training to support SP&M should be designed to match program priorities.
Indeed, to plan training on SP&M, examine program priorities first, and use
them as clues for designing initial training efforts.
In most cases, when organizations establish systematic SP&M, training
should be undertaken to answer the following questions:
▲ What is the organization’s SP&M program? What are its mission, policy,
procedures, and activities?
▲ What are the desirable roles of management employees, succession
planning and management facilitators, and individual employees in the
SP&M program?
▲ What is the organization’s preferred approach to clarifying present and
future work requirements? How should it relate to SP&M as a source of
information about activities, duties, responsibilities, competencies, and
success factors in key positions?
▲ What is the organization’s performance appraisal system, and how
should it relate to succession as a source of information about individual
job performance?
▲ What is the organization’s formally planned individual career planning
program (if one exists), and how does it relate to succession as a source
of information about individual career goals and aspirations?
▲ What is the organization’s potential assessment program (if one exists,
as it should), and how does it relate to succession as a source of information
about individual potential for future advancement?
▲ How do the organization’s training, education, and development programs
relate to preparing individuals for succession and advancement?
▲ What is an individual development plan? Why is planning for individual
development important? How should programs for individual development
be designed? Implemented? Tracked?
▲ How does the organization keep track of its human talent?
▲ How should the organization evaluate and continuously improve its
SP&M program?

Refining the Program
165
▲ How should the organization handle special issues in SP&M—such as
high performers, high potentials, and plateaued workers?
▲ How should the SP&M program be linked to the organization’s strategy?
To HR strategy? To other plans (as appropriate)?
Refer to the draft training outlines appearing in Exhibit 7-2 and to the training
material provided on the CD-ROM accompanying this book as starting points
for developing in-house training sessions on SP&M. Note that such training
should be tailor-made to meet organizational needs.
As an alternative, decision-makers may prefer to contract with qualified
external consultants to design and deliver training on SP&M for the organization.
Such consultants may be located through word-of-mouth referrals from
practitioners in other organizations, those who have written extensively on
SP&M, or organizations listed on the Web. They are especially appropriate to
use when in-house expertise is limited, external consultants will lend initial
credibility to the program, the pressure is on to obtain quick results, or inhouse
staff members are unavailable. If decision-makers decide to use external
assistance, then the consultants should be invited in for a day or two to discuss
what assistance they can provide. They should be asked for references from
previous organizations with which they have worked. Before their arrival, they
should also be given detailed background information about the organization
and its existing SP&M programs and challenges.
Many external consultants will begin by meeting individually with key decision-makers
and will then provide a brief group presentation about SP&M
issues. Both can serve a valuable purpose. Individual meetings will emphasize
the importance of the issue. Group meetings will help to informally educate
participants about state-of-the-art practices outside the organization, which
can create an impetus for change.
Ensuring Attendance at Training: A Key Issue
Perhaps the single most challenging aspect of offering training on SP&M is
securing the critical mass necessary to ensure consistent approaches throughout
the organization. It is particularly difficult to ensure that key managers will
attend group training—and they are precisely the most important to reach
because they exert the greatest influence on SP&M issues. But no matter what
is done, some key managers will claim that they have too much work to do
and cannot spare valuable time away from work to attend. Others will not
attend and will offer no explanation. But it may prove to be impossible to fit
them into any group training schedule that is established. No magic elixir will
solve these problems. It amounts to a matter of commitment. If members of
the board of directors and the CEO are genuinely committed to ensuring effective
succession planning, then they will become personally involved to ensure
(text continues on page 170)

166 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 7-2. Sample Outlines for In-House Training on Succession Planning
and Management
Purpose
To provide an opportunity for skill-building on employee performance appraisal,
potential assessment, and individual development planning
Targeted Participants
Individuals, such as key position incumbents and immediate organizational superiors
of high-potentials, who have important roles to play in implementing the action
plan governing the succession planning program
Objectives
Upon completion of this training, participants should be able to:
1. Explain the organization’s business reasons for establishing an
SP&M program and the relationship between SP&M and strategic planning
and human resources planning.
2. Describe the mission, policy, procedures, and activities of the SP&M program.
3. Review the roles and responsibilities of managers in preparing their employees
to assume key positions in the organization.
4. Explain how the organization clarifies work requirements and identifies key
positions.
5. Explain the role of employee performance appraisal in SP&M and describe
the organization’s performance appraisal procedures.
6. Conduct effective employee performance appraisal interviews.
7. Explain the role of employee potential assessment in SP&M and describe
the organization’s procedures for potential assessment.
8. Conduct effective employee potential assessments.
9. Explain the role of individual development planning in SP&M and describe
the organization’s procedures for individual development planning.
10. Select and oversee appropriate internal development approaches.
11. Explain when promotion from within is—and is not—appropriate for filling
key vacancies.
12. Review the organization’s approach to inventorying human talent.

Refining the Program
167
Outline—Session 1
‘‘Introducing Succession Planning and Management’’
I. Introduction
A. Purpose of the session
B. Objectives of the session
C. Organization (structure) of the session
II. Defining Succession Planning and Management (SP&M)
A. What is it?
B. Why is it important generally?
III. Relating SP&M to the Organization
A. What are present organizational conditions?
B. What are the organization’s strategic plans/goals?
C. What are the organization’s human resources plans and goals?
D. What is the need for SP&M, given organizational strategy and human
resource plans?
IV. The Purpose of the SP&M Program
A. Mission
B. Policy
C. Procedures
D. Activities
V. Roles in SP&M
A. What should be the role of the immediate organizational superior?
B. What should be the individual’s role in SP&M?
VI. Defining Work Requirements
A. Job Analysis/Competency Models
B. Job Descriptions and Specifications/Competency Models
C. Other Approaches
VII. Identifying Key Positions
A. How are they defined?
B. Where are they located?
C. How will key positions change in the future—and why?
VIII. Conclusion
A. Summary
B. Action planning for on-the-job action
C. Session evaluations
(continues)

168 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Exhibit 7-2. (continued)
Outline—Session 2
‘‘Conducting Effective Employee Performance Appraisals for
Succession Planning and Management’’
I. Introduction
A. Purpose of the session
B. Objectives of the session
C. Organization (structure) of the session
II. Defining Employee Performance Appraisal
A. What is it?
B. Why is it important generally?
III. Relating Employee Performance Appraisal to SP&M
A. Approaches
B. Current method
C. Relationship between appraisal and SP&M
IV. Reviewing the Organization’s Performance Appraisal Procedures
A. Overview
B. Step-by-step description of procedures
V. Conducting Effective Performance Appraisal Interviews
A. Overview
B. Using the form to structure the interview
VI. Role Plays (practice appraisal interviews)
VII. Conclusion
A. Summary
B. Action planning for on-the-job action
C. Session evaluations
Outline—Session 3
‘‘Conducting Effective Employee Potential Assessment for
Succession Planning and Management’’
I. Introduction
A. Purpose of the session
B. Objectives of the session
C. Organization (structure) of the session
II. Defining Employee Potential Assessment
A. What is it?
B. Why is it important generally?
III. Relating Employee Potential Assessment to SP&M
A. Approaches
B. Current method
C. Relationship between potential assessment and SP&M

Refining the Program
169
IV. Reviewing the Organization’s Potential Assessment Procedures
A. Overview
B. Step-by-step description of procedures
V. Conducting Effective Potential Assessment
A. Overview
B. Using existing forms and procedures
C. Gathering individual career planning information for use with potential
assessment
VI. (Optional) Role Plays (practice potential assessment interviews)
VII. Conclusion
A. Summary
B. Action planning for on-the-job action
C. Session evaluations
Outline—Session 4
‘‘Conducting Effective Individual Development Planning’’
I. Introduction
A. Purpose of the session
B. Objectives of the session
C. Organization (structure) of the session
II. Defining Individual Development Planning
A. What is it?
B. Why is it important generally?
III. Relating Individual Development Planning to SP&M
A. Approaches
B. Current method
C. Relationship between individual development planning and SP&M
IV. Reviewing Approaches to Individual Development Planning
A. Overview
B. Step-by-step description of approach
V. Facilitating Effective Individual Development Planning
A. Overview
B. Approaches to individual development planning
C. Relating individual career planning to individual development planning
VI. Conclusion
A. Summary
B. Action planning for on-the-job action
C. Session evaluations

170 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
the attendance of the targeted training participants. They will also attend
themselves—and perhaps help deliver the training—and thereby demonstrate
hands-on interest and support. Their participation and involvement will exert
a powerful, but subtle, inducement for others to attend. But if they are unwilling
to be involved, no amount of cajoling or threatening is an effective substitute.
Moreover, they must set the example and follow the policies established
for the organization.
Here are a few tips for securing attendance at group training on SP&M,
assuming that adequate top management commitment exists:
▲ Draft a memo for the chairman or CEO to initial to go out with training
invitations. Stress who will be in attendance, what issues will be discussed,
and why the training is important.
▲ Pick an opportune time. Check dates to make sure that the dates chosen
for training do not conflict with other, predictable dates.
▲ If possible, tie the training on succession planning to other events—
such as strategic planning retreats—in which the targeted participants
are already scheduled to attend.
▲ Field-test the training materials on a small, handpicked group of supportive
managers. Be sure that all time is effectively used and that every
training activity relates directly to SP&M practices in the organization.
▲ If possible, videotape a well-rehearsed practice session and share it before
the session with the chairman, CEO, or other key management personnel.
Ask for their suggestions about revision before the session.
Other Approaches to Training Management Employees
There will always be some management employees who will be unable to attend
group training on SP&M, even when vigorous steps are taken to ensure
attendance. They will have legitimate reasons for not attending. But that will
not alter the fact that they missed the training. They are the group most likely
to operate in a way inconsistent with organizational policy because they
missed the opportunity to learn about it firsthand.
Deal with this audience through a form of ‘‘guerrilla warfare.’’ Make sure
that it is clear who they are. Then use any of the following tactics to train them:
▲ Meet with them individually, if their numbers are small enough to make
that practical and if they are not so geographically dispersed that traveling
to their locations is prohibitively expensive. Deliver training personally.
▲ Videotape a practice session of the training and send it to those unable
to attend. Then follow up with them later for their questions and reactions.

Refining the Program
171
▲ Ask another manager who did attend—such as the CEO—to describe to
them the key lessons of the training in his or her own words. (That
should reinforce the importance of the message.)
Training Participants in Succession Planning and Management
Training for participants in SP&M will be greatly affected by the organization’s
communication strategy. If decision-makers do not wish to inform individuals
of the organization’s SP&M practices, then no training will typically be given;
on the other hand, if the organization adopts a policy of openness, then training
on SP&M may be offered.
There are three general ways of offering such training: (1) direct training;
(2) training integrated with other issues; and (3) training tied to career planning.
Direct Training
In direct training, employees are informed of the organization’s SP&M policy
and procedures. They are briefed in general terms, usually without specific
descriptions of how the program is linked to existing organizational strategy.
They learn how the SP&M program is linked to defining work requirements
and job competencies, appraising present employee performance, assessing
future individual potential, and establishing individual development plans.
Training Integrated with Other Issues
When training on SP&M is integrated with other issues, employees are told
how their training, education, and development efforts factor into qualifying
for advancement. No promises are made; rather, the value of planned learning
activities is stressed as one means by which the individual can take proactive
steps to qualify for leadership positions.
Training Tied to Career Planning
Organizational succession planning and individual career planning represent
mirror images of the same issue. Succession planning and management helps
the organization meet its HR needs to ensure that it is equipped with the talent
needed to survive and succeed. On the other hand, individual career planning
helps the individual establish career goals and prepare for meeting those
goals—either inside or outside the organization.
When training on SP&M is tied to training on career planning, individuals
are furnished with information about work requirements at different levels
and in different functions or locations. They also learn about performance
requirements in different job categories and about future success factors. With
this information, they can establish their own career goals and take active steps
to prepare themselves for advancement by seeking appropriate training, education,
and development experiences.

172 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
Counseling Managers About Succession Planning Problems
in Their Areas
Succession planning and management coordinators should make a point of
meeting periodically with managers to discuss SP&M issues in their work areas
and to offer individualized counseling about how to deal with those problems.
If that counseling is requested, it indicates that executives have accepted
SP&M, they value advice about people management issues, and they are making
honest efforts to meet the SP&M needs of their organization.
The Need for Individual Counseling Sessions
Executives sometimes have need of third-party advice. In some cases they will
be reluctant to share those problems with anyone—including the CEO—for
fear that they will be perceived as unable to manage tough-to-handle management
situations. Individual counseling with these executives by the SP&M coordinator
can serve an invaluable purpose for improving SP&M practices. For
this reason, the CEO and other decision-makers in the organization should
actively encourage such sessions.
Who Should Conduct the Sessions?
The SP&M coordinator should arrange to meet with senior executives to conduct
individual counseling sessions on a regular basis. However, the coordinator
must first seize the initiative to arrange the meetings until the coordinator
has gained sufficient credibility to be sought out for help by executives.
The SP&M coordinator should call each senior executive periodically and
ask when they can meet. Although these individual meetings can be timeconsuming,
they are the best way to demonstrate commitment to the effort—
and get real payoffs from it. Individual meetings are usually best timed sometime
ahead of periodic SP&M meetings, such as those held quarterly in many
corporations. By meeting ahead of time, the SP&M coordinator and the executive
in charge of that work area can discuss sensitive personnel issues that
executives may be reluctant to bring up in group meetings—or share over the
phone or by mail.
Essential Requirements for Effective Counseling Sessions
To conduct effective counseling sessions, follow these general guidelines:
1. Send questions in advance, making the purpose of the session clear.
2. Tailor the questions to issues that will be treated in regularly scheduled
group meetings with the CEO so that their relevance is immediately
apparent.

Refining the Program
173
3. Keep the meeting short and on target unless asked to offer advice on
specific issues.
4. Always assume that everything is said in strictest confidence. (This point
deserves strong emphasis.)
5. Be alert to casual remarks or questions that may indicate problems,
probing with additional questions to learn more as appropriate.
Common Succession Planning and Management Problems—and
Possible Solutions
Succession planning and management coordinators who meet to counsel
managers on ‘‘people problems’’ unique to their areas should be prepared to
deal with complex problems. Many events may derail the progress of otherwise
high-potential employees, and an SP&M coordinator should be prepared
to offer advice on what to do about those problems. Reclaiming high-potential
employees on the verge of derailing their careers is an important role, and one
that is often informally loaded on the SP&M coordinator.
Over the years I have been asked to offer executives advice on how to
counsel high potentials experiencing the following problems that threatened
to derail their futures:
▲ An executive engaged in a high-profile extramarital affair with a subordinate
▲ An executive accused of blatant sexual harassment—but where the accusation
could not be substantiated
▲ An executive, slated for the CEO spot, who was recognized as an alcoholic
by everyone except himself
▲ A male executive who was grossly insubordinate to his female superior
▲ An executive renowned for her technical knowledge who was notorious
for her inability to work harmoniously with her peers
▲ An executive who experienced a major personality conflict with his immediate
superior
These are merely samples of the problems about which the SP&M coordinator
may be asked to offer advice.
Although few SP&M coordinators are trained psychologists or psychiatrists,
they should be able to apply the following steps, which I have found helpful
when advising executives about ‘‘people problems.’’
Step 1: Ask for information about the present situation. What is happening
now? Where is the executive obtaining information? When and how was
this information revealed? Was the information obtained firsthand, or is the

174 L AYING THE FOUNDATION FOR A S UCCESSION P LANNING AND M ANAGEMENT P ROGRAM
executive relying on intermediaries, rumors, or speculation? What steps have
been taken to separate fact from fancy?
Step 2: Ask for information about corrective actions already attempted.
What efforts, if any, have already been made to correct the problem? What
were the results of those actions? What efforts have been made to alert the
affected individual to the problem or to clarify desired behavior or performance?
Step 3: Determine the problem’s cause, if possible, and assess whether it
can be solved. What does the executive believe is the cause of the problem?
Does the person who is experiencing the problem know what to do? (If not, it
may indicate a training need.) Is the person engaging in undesirable behavior
deliberately and maliciously? (If so, it may indicate a disciplinary problem.)
Has anyone asked the person experiencing the problem to identify its cause
and possible solution(s)? Can the individual avoid derailing his or her career,
or have matters already gone so far that others have lost all confidence for
improvement?
Step 4: Establish an action plan. Emphasize the importance of properly
managing the organization’s human resources to the executive who is receiving
the counseling. Express strong confidence in the executive’s ability to deal
with the problem. Offer to help in any way possible. Suggest such steps as
these: (1) Put the problem in writing and meet with the person having the
problem so as to make it as clear as possible; (2) encourage the executive to
clarify, in writing, what needs to be done, how it should be done, and what
will happen if it is not done.
Step 5: Follow up. After meeting with the executive who has had a problem,
the SP&M coordinator should make a point of following up later to see
how the problem was resolved or is being managed.
By following the five steps outlined above, SP&M coordinators should be
able to identify and resolve most ‘‘people problems.’’ That is a valuable service
in its own right to an organization, and it can help people who are in danger
of derailing get ‘‘back on track.’’
Summary
This chapter focused on refining the succession planning and management
program. It summarized what was needed to prepare a program action plan,
communicate the action plan, and counsel managers on succession planning
and management problems—particularly those having to do with ‘‘people
problems’’—unique to their areas of responsibility.
To be successful, however, any succession planning and management program
should be based on systematic analyses of present job requirements or

Refining the Program
175
competencies, future job requirements or competencies, present individual
performance, and future individual potential. Conducting such analyses is not
for the faint-hearted, the ill-prepared, or the uncommitted. These processes
require hard work and diligence, as the next section of this book will show.

This page intentionally left blank

PART
III
ASSESSING THE PRESENT AND THE FUTURE
Part I
Background Information About
Succession Planning and Management
Part IV
Closing the “Developmental Gap”:
Operating and Evaluating a Succession
Planning and Management Program
Part II
Laying the Foundation for a
Succession Planning and
Management Program
Part III
Assessing the Present and the Future
•Identify key positions.
•Use approaches to determine work requirements in key positions.
•Use full-circle, multirater assessment.
•Appraise performance.
•Create talent pools.
•Identify key positions for the future.
•Use approaches to determine future work requirements in key
positions.

This page intentionally left blank

C H A P T E R 8
ASSESSING PRESENT WORK
REQUIREMENTS AND INDIVIDUAL
JOB PERFORMANCE
Leaders must know the present before they can plan the future. 1 They must
realistically view the organization’s strengths and weaknesses before they can
navigate around future external threats and seize opportunities as they arise.
That can be a daunting task because leaders are biased observers: they are,
after all, accountable in large measure for an organization’s strengths and
weaknesses. It is thus easy for them to overlook weaknesses, since the causes
of those weaknesses may be rooted in their own past decisions; it is easy for
them to overlook strengths, which they may take for granted. Managers, it has
been shown, 2 will persist in an ill-fated course of action because they fall prey
to the gambler’s fallacy, that ‘‘more effort will lead to a big payoff.’’ But some
efforts never pay off; rather, they lead to mounting losses. That is why organizations
replace leaders after a repeated string of failures.
Many of the same basic principles apply to succession planning and management
(SP&M). Before leaders can effectively plan for succession, they must
be aware of the organization’s work requirements and the strengths and weaknesses
of its leadership. Indeed, having the right person for the right job at the
right time is a strategic issue of key importance that has long been a major
challenge to top managers. But to know who those people are and what they
must do, the organization must first be able to furnish answers to such questions
as these:
▲ What are the organization’s key positions?
▲ What are the work requirements or competencies required in key positions?
▲ How should individual performance be appraised?
This chapter focuses on answering these questions. It thus emphasizes examining
present conditions. The next chapter focuses on anticipating future
conditions. Taken together, they are a starting point for long-term and systematic
SP&M.
179

180 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Identifying Key Positions
To achieve maximum benefits from a systematic succession planning program,
begin by identifying the key positions. The reason for doing this is that key
positions underscore and dramatize important work processes that must be
carried out and results that must be continuously accomplished. Key positions
warrant attention because they represent strategically vital leverage points affecting
organizational success. When they are left vacant—or when the work is
left undone, for whatever reason—the organization will not be able to meet
or exceed customer expectations, confront competition successfully, or follow
through on efforts of crucial long-term significance.
Identifying Key Positions
A key position exerts critical influence on organizational activities—operationally,
strategically, or both. Key positions have traditionally been viewed as
those at the pinnacle of the organization’s chain of command. The most obvious
reason is that important decision making has been done at the top of most
organizations and imposed downward. But, as decision making has become
more decentralized, as a result of increasing employee involvement and the
application of principles linked to high-involvement work organizations, key
positions have become diffused throughout organizations. Hence, they may
reside at many points on the organization chart.
Key positions are not identical across organizations. There are several reasons
why. One reason is that all organizations do not allocate work in exactly
the same way. Positions sharing job titles in different organizations do not
necessarily perform identical duties. A second reason is that top managers in
different organizations do not share the same values. As a result, they may vest
job incumbents with more or less responsibility, which is influenced by their
own perceptions (and values) about which activities are most important. A
third reason is that organizations do not share identical strengths and weaknesses
or face identical environmental threats and opportunities. Hence, a key
position in one organization may not be a key position in another. Key positions
are thus unique to a single organization.
Let’s focus on six ways to identify key positions:
By the Consequences/Uproar Resulting from a Pending or Existing Vacancy
When the organization lacks a key position incumbent—defined as someone
occupying a key position at any level, in any function, or at any location—it is
apparent because important decisions cannot be reached, orders cannot be
shipped, production cannot proceed, customers’ needs cannot be satisfied, or
bills are left unpaid. In short, a vacancy in a key position creates an uproar
because an important activity is placed ‘‘on hold’’ until the right talent is se-

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
181
cured to make an informed decision, complete a process, or achieve results.
This delay can prove costly, placing an organization at risk to competitors who
do not face such a handicap. Possible results include loss of customers, market
share, and (in the worst cases) bankruptcy.
One way, then, to recognize a key position is by the consequences of—or
uproar caused by—not filling a vacancy when it exists or is expected. I call
this the uproar method of identifying key positions. Generally, the greater the
uproar created by an existing or a pending vacancy, the greater the importance
of that key position and the work process(es) over which it exerts influence.
By Organization Charting
Prepare a current organization chart. Show all functions. List the leader’s name
in each function, if the organization is sufficiently small to make that possible.
Then list the number of people assigned to carry out the function. Pose these
questions: (1) ‘‘What does this function uniquely contribute to the organization’s
mission?’’ and (2) ‘‘Could this function operate effectively if the leader
were gone?’’
The answer to the first question provides valuable clues about organizational
processes. It should be expressed in terms of the inputs, transformational
processes, and outputs of that function relative to the organization’s
work. That tells why the function is important—and what it does to accomplish
the results desired from it.
The answer to the second question yields clues about key positions. If the
answer is no, then the next question to ask is, ‘‘Why is that leader so valuable?
What is it that makes him or her important—and potentially tough to replace?
Does he or she possess specialized expertise or carry out specialized work
duties?’’ (If so, then it is a key position.) ‘‘Do the staff members collectively
assigned to that function lack the ability to achieve results in the absence of a
leader?’’ (If so, then a potential replacement need has been identified that
should be shored up.)
If the answer is yes, then ask, ‘‘Why is the function able to operate without
the leader? Are others particularly key to its operation?’’ If that is the case, then
the leader does not occupy a key position, but one or more workers do.
If this activity is carried to its natural conclusion, key positions should be
easily identified on the organization chart. Each key position is tied to a critically
important organizational function, result, or work process. A vacancy in
any key position will represent a hole, a gap between an organizational requirement
and the human talent needed to meet that requirement.
By Questioning
Most senior executives have a keen grasp of their areas of responsibility. Ask
them what they regard as key positions within their own areas by posing a
question like, ‘‘What positions in your area of responsibility are so important

182 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
that, if they suddenly became vacant, your part of the organization would face
major problems in achieving results?’’ Ask for the titles of the positions to be
listed, not the names of job incumbents. Then ask, ‘‘Why are these positions
so important?’’ Don’t provide clues; rather, allow executives to furnish their
own rationales. (That tactic is likely to lead to the best information.)
By Historical Evidence
Has the organization experienced crises or uproars in the past resulting from
unexpected departures by key job incumbents? Use evidence of past uproars
as indicators of where key positions are located. Scan personnel records to
obtain the names and job titles of people who departed in the last few years.
Then contact their former supervisors in the organization to find out which
departures posed the greatest problems for the organization and why they
posed problems. Were they in tough-to-fill positions? Did they possess unique,
difficult-to-replace knowledge and skills? What was it exactly that made these
losses so important? How was the uproar handled? If a vacancy occurred in
the same position again, would it still cause an uproar? Why? Compile the
answers to these questions as evidence of key positions.
By Network Charting
Network charting is a technique of communication analysis that has been used
in identifying employment discrimination. 3 But its applications are potentially
much more powerful in charting the decision-making process in organizations.
The idea is a simple one: trace the path of communication flows during
one or more decisions to answer such questions as ‘‘Who is included?’’ ‘‘Who
is excluded?’’ and ‘‘Why are some individuals included or excluded?’’
A key assumption of network charting is that decision-makers will seek
information only from individuals who occupy important positions and/or
who are viewed as credible, trustworthy, and knowledgeable about the issues.
Significantly, it has also been shown that decision-makers prefer to include
people like themselves—and exclude people unlike themselves—from decision-making
processes. Hence, communication flows in the same way that succession
decisions are often made—that is, through homosocial reproduction, 4
the tendency of leaders to perpetuate themselves by sponsoring people who
are in some way like themselves. As Rosabeth Moss Kanter describes the process,
‘‘Because of the situation in which managers function, because of the
position of managers in the corporate structure, social similarity tends to become
extremely important to them. The structure sets in motion forces leading
to the replication of managers as the same kind of social individuals. And the
men who manage reproduce themselves in kind.’’ 5
Network charting can be carried out by interviewing people or by retracing
communication flows. But another way, though time-consuming, is to shadow a
key decision-maker to determine firsthand what positions and what individuals

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
183
are included in making a decision and why they are included. In this application
of network charting, the aim is not to uncover employment discrimination;
rather, it is to determine which positions are considered key to decision
making in each part of the organization. The results should yield valuable information
about key positions in—and the route of work processes through—
the organization.
By Combination
A sixth and final approach is to combine two or more other approaches listed
above. Academic researchers call this triangulation, 6 since it involves verifying
information by double-checking it from multiple sources. Radar and sonar operators
originated the approach, I believe, as a way to obtain a definite fix on
an object. Practically speaking, however, many organizations have neither time
nor resources to double-check key positions. Often, only one approach is
used.
What Information Should the Organization Maintain About Key
Positions?
Once key positions have been identified, additional questions will present
themselves. For example:
▲ Who occupies those key positions now? What are their qualifications?
What background, education, experience, or other specialized knowledge
did they bring to their positions?
▲ What are the work requirements in key positions? (See the next section
below.)
▲ When are those key positions likely to become vacant? Can some key
vacancies be predicted based on the announced retirement or career
plans of key position incumbents?
▲ Where are key positions located in the organization? (Answer that question
based on the organization’s structure, job categories, and geographical
locations.)
▲ How is performance appraised in the organization? How well do performance
appraisal practices match up to information about work requirements
or competencies by position?
▲ How well are the key position incumbents presently performing? Did
their backgrounds, education, and experience properly equip them to
perform? If not, what are they lacking?
▲ How did key job incumbents secure their positions? Were they groomed
to assume their positions, recruited from outside, transferred from
within, or did they reach their positions through other means?

184 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
By answering these questions, the organization can begin to establish an information
system to track key positions, key position incumbents, and individual
performance.
Three Approaches to Determining Work Requirements in
Key Positions
Once key positions have been identified, direct attention to determining the
work requirements in those positions. After all, the only way that individuals
can be prepared as replacements for key positions is to clarify first what the
key position incumbents do and what kind of characteristics they possess. At
least three ways may be used to do that, and they are described below.
1. Conducting Job and Task Analysis
Job analysis summarizes or outlines the activities, responsibilities, duties, or
essential functions of a job. Task analysis goes a step beyond job analysis to
determine what must be done to carry out each activity or meet each responsibility,
duty, or essential function. The result of a job analysis is called a job
description; the result of a task analysis is called a task inventory. Some authorities
distinguish between the terms job and position:
A job consists of a group of related activities
and duties. Ideally, the duties of a job should
consist of natural units of work that are similar
and related. They should be clear and distinct
from those of other jobs to minimize misunderstanding
and conflict among employees and
to enable employees to recognize what is expected
of them. For some jobs, several employees
may be required, each of whom will
occupy a separate position. A position consists
of different duties and responsibilities
performedbyonlyoneemployee. 7
It is thus important to distinguish between a job description, which provides
information about an entire job category (such as supervisors, managers,
or executives), and a position description, which provides information unique
to one employee. In most cases, the focus of determining work requirements
for SP&M is on positions, since the aim is to identify work requirements
unique to key positions.

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
185
What Is a Position Description?
A position description summarizes the duties, activities, or responsibilities of
a position. Hence, it literally describes a position in one organizational setting.
It answers this question: ‘‘What are incumbents in the position expected to do
in the organization?’’
No universal standards exist either for job descriptions or for position descriptions.
8 In most organizations, however, position descriptions list at least
the title, salary or wage level, location in the organization, and essential job
functions. An essential job function, a legal term used in the Americans with
Disabilities Act, is an activity that must be conducted by a position incumbent.
More specifically, it ‘‘is [a job activity] that’s fundamental to successful performance
of the job, as opposed to marginal job functions, which may be
performed by particular incumbents at particular times, but are incidental to
the main purpose of the job. If the performance of a job function is only a
matter of convenience, and not necessary, it’s a marginal function.’’ 9
Some organizations add other features to job descriptions, and the same
features may be added to position descriptions as well. These additions may
include, for instance, the approximate time devoted to each essential job function,
the percentage of a position’s total time devoted to each essential job
function, the relative importance of each essential job function to successful
performance, and a job specification listing the minimum qualifications required
for selection.
How Is Position Analysis Conducted?
Position analysis is conducted in the same way as job and task analysis. As
Carlisle notes, ‘‘the process of analyzing jobs and tasks involves at least three
key steps. First, the job or task is broken down into its component parts. Second,
the relationships between the parts are examined and compared with
correct principles of performance. Third, the parts are restructured to form an
improved job or task, and learning requirements are specified.’’ 10
Use the worksheet appearing in Exhibit 8-1 as a guide for preparing a current
key position description. For ideas about what essential job functions to
list, see The Dictionary of Occupational Titles (published by the U.S. Department
of Labor), works on the Americans with Disabilities Act, 11 and references
about management job descriptions. 12
Advantages and Disadvantages of Position Descriptions
Position descriptions are advantageous for identifying work requirements for
three reasons. First, most organizations have at least job descriptions, which
can be an important starting point on which to base more individualized position
descriptions. Second, position descriptions can be the basis for making
and justifying many personnel decisions—including selection, appraisal, and

186 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 8-1. A Worksheet for Writing a Key Position Description
Directions: Give careful thought to the process of writing this position description,
since it can be critically important in recruiting, selecting, orienting, training, appraising,
and developing a job incumbent for a key position. The best approach is
to ask the key position incumbent to write the description and then to review it
several levels up, down, and across the organization. (In that way, it should be
possible to obtain valuable information about the desired results necessary for this
position at present—some of which even the current position incumbent may be unaware
of.) For now, focus on what the position incumbent is presently doing and what
others in the organization want the key position incumbent to be doing in the future.
Add paper if necessary.
Title: (Fill in the position title)
Salary Level: (Note the present pay grade)
Organizational Unit/Department: (Note the present placement of the position in
the organizational structure)
Immediate Supervisor: (Note to whom the position incumbent presently reports on the
organization chart by title)
Position Summary: (In one or two sentences, summarize the purpose—or mission
statement—for this position. Answer this question: why does it exist?)
Position Duties/Responsibilities/Activities/Key Results/Competencies/Essential Functions:
(Make a list in the left column below of the most important position duties,
responsibilities, activities, key results, competencies, or essential functions. If necessary,
use a separate sheet to draft the list and then record the results of your deliberations
in priority order in the space below. Be sure to list the most important duty,
responsibility, activity, key result, or essential function first. Begin each statement with
an action verb. Then, in the right column, indicate the approximate percentage of
time devoted to that activity.)
List of Position Duties/
Responsibilities/Activities/
Key Results/Essential Functions:
Approximate % of
Time Devoted to
Each:

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
187
training—and not just decisions linked to succession planning and management.
Third and finally, legislation—particularly the Americans with Disabilities
Act—has made written expressions of work requirements important as
legal evidence of what is necessary to perform the work. 13
However, position descriptions are by no means foolproof. First, they tend
to focus on activities, not so much on results. Second, they may leave out
important personal characteristics that are crucial to successful job performance.
Third, they date quickly. Keeping them updated can be a time-consuming
chore.
2. Identifying Competencies and Developing a Competency Model
Competency identification is a possible step beyond job and task analysis as a
means of clarifying key position requirements. In this context, competency
refers to ‘‘an underlying characteristic of an employee (that is, motive, trait,
skill, aspects of one’s self-image, social role, or a body of knowledge) which
results in effective and/or superior performance in a job’’ 14 ; competency identification
pinpoints competencies; and a competency model ‘‘includes those
competencies that are required for satisfactory or exemplary job performance
within the context of a person’s job roles, responsibilities and relationships in
an organization and its internal and external environments.’’ 15
Competency models have emerged as the mainstream approach used in
many organizations to integrate all facets of human resource management.
Competency identification was described at greater length in Chapter 4. Most
well-known companies have based their succession programs on competency
models, which become blueprints of the talent to be developed.
3. Rapid Results Assessment
A new approach to competency modeling is needed to maximize the strengths
and minimize the weaknesses of traditional approaches. Such a new approach
may involve the marriage of a traditional approach to competency assessment,
such as McLagan’s Flexible Approach, 16 with the so-called DACUM method.
DACUM is short for Developing A Curriculum. 17 It has been widely used in
job and task analysis for technical positions and in establishing occupational
curricula at community colleges. Seldom, however, has it been described as a
means by which to determine work requirements in management or professional
positions.
To use DACUM in its traditional sense, select a facilitator who is trained in
the approach. Convene a panel consisting of eight to twelve people who are
expert in the job. Then take the following steps 18 :

188 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
1. Orient the committee to DACUM.
2. Review the job or occupational area of concern.
3. Identify the general areas of responsibility of the job.
4. Identify the specific tasks performed in each area of responsibility.
5. Review and refine task and duty statements.
6. Sequence task and duty statements.
7. Identify entry-level tasks.
The result of a typical DACUM panel is a detailed matrix illustrating work
activities. They are arranged in order of difficulty, from the simplest to the
most complex activities. In DACUM’s traditional application, panel members
approach descriptions of ‘‘personality characteristics’’ as an additional activity.
For instance, at the conclusion of the DACUM session panel members may be
asked a question such as, ‘‘What personal characteristics describe an effective
job incumbent?’’ That question should elicit responses from panel members
such as ‘‘Punctuality,’’ ‘‘Good attendance,’’ ‘‘Ability to work harmoniously
with coworkers,’’ or ‘‘Dresses appropriately.’’ Rarely are such characteristics
linked to specific, measurable behaviors, though they may be critical to successful
job performance.
In practice, a DACUM panel usually meets in a quiet room for one or more
days. The facilitator asks panelists to list work activities, in round-robin fashion,
in no particular order. Each activity is written with Magic Marker on a
sheet of paper and posted on a blank wall at the front of the room. Because
panelists can list activities quickly, most DACUM facilitators need one or two
confederates to assist them by writing the activities and posting them on the
wall. Panelists who are unable to think of an activity are skipped. The process
continues until all the panelists exhaust activities to list.
At that point, the facilitator calls a break. With the help of confederates—
and perhaps one or more panelists or other job experts—the facilitator devises
descriptive categories for the activities and groups related activities. When finished,
the facilitator reconvenes the panel. Panelists add, subtract, or modify
categories and verify activities. Finally, they sequence categories and activities
from most simple to most complex. These steps closely resemble classic brainstorming,
which consists of two steps: idea generation and idea evaluation. 19
To use DACUM as a tool for competency assessment, facilitators should
take additional steps. Once a DACUM job matrix has been completed and verified,
facilitators should adjourn the panel and plan to convene at another time.
Once the panel is reconvened, facilitators should present panelists with the
DACUM job matrix, either as an individualized handout or as a large wall chart.
Facilitators should then progress around the room, focusing panelists’ attention
on each cell of the job matrix, and asking panelists to (1) list underlying
motives, traits, aspects of self-image, social roles, or body of knowledge that
effective job incumbents should exhibit to carry out that activity; and (2) work

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
189
outputs or results stemming from each activity. The answers should be written
inside each cell.
Once again, the panel should be adjourned briefly. As in the first panel
meeting, facilitators should make an effort to eliminate duplication and economically
list personal characteristics and work outputs for each activity. When
facilitators are finished, they should again reconvene the panel and seek verification
and consensus on the results. If the meeting runs too long, facilitators
may adjourn and follow up by written survey, thereby turning traditional brainstorming
into a modified delphi process. 20
The value of this approach should be apparent. First, it is much faster than
traditional competency modeling. (That is a major advantage, and it is worth
emphasizing.) Second, this approach—like traditional DACUM—has high face
validity because it uses experienced job incumbents (or other knowledgeable
people). It should gain ready acceptance in the organization. Third, it permits
the personal involvement of key decision-makers, thereby building the ownership
that stems from participation. Fourth and finally, it enjoys the key advantage
of a competency-based approach in that the modified DACUM moves
beyond the traditional focus on work activities or tasks to include descriptions
of underlying characteristics and/ or outputs.
Of course, this new approach—which I have chosen to call rapid results
assessment—does have its disadvantages. The results do not have the research
rigor of other competency-assessment approaches. Hence, rigor is sacrificed
for speed. Second, the results of the approach will depend heavily on the
credibility of the individual panelists. If inexperienced people or poor performers
participate, the results will be viewed with suspicion.
Rapid results assessment can provide valuable information for succession
planning and management. If the assessment process is focused on key positions—and
DACUM panels include immediate superiors, peers, incumbents,
and even subordinates—it can yield powerful information about role expectations
for incumbents in these positions. It can also provide the basis, as
DACUM does, to select, appraise, train, reward, and develop people who are
being groomed for key positions.
Using Full-Circle, Multirater Assessments
Since the publication of the first edition of this book in 1994, many organizations
have begun to use full-circle, multirater assessments as a means to appraise
an individual’s present performance or future potential. 21 (And it is
worth emphasizing that those are two different things. Remember: Successful
performance in a current position is no guarantee of success at a higherlevel
position, for the simple reason that requirements differ by level.) Such
assessments—sometimes called 360-degree assessments because they examine
an individual from a full circle around him or her—are useful ways to collect

190 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
much data from organizational superiors, subordinates, peers or colleagues,
and even customers, suppliers, distributors, and family members. They usually
indicate how well an individual is performing (or has the potential to perform)
when compared to competency models or work requirements. Many full-circle,
multirater assessment questionnaires can be purchased from commercial vendors
or accessed online, though off-the-shelf solutions should be used cautiously
because they are not corporate-culture specific.
Questions to Consider
But many questions arise when decision-makers contemplate using full-circle,
multirater assessments. Among them are the following:
1. Who will be assessed, and by whom will they be assessed?
2. What will be assessed? Will it be present performance, future potential,
or both?
3. When will the assessment occur?
4. Why is the assessment being conducted? Since full-circle, multirater assessment
is expensive, will the benefits in improved accuracy and credibility
of results outweigh the costs?
5. How will the assessment be conducted? Will it be conducted online, on
paper, or by a combination? What will be done with the results, how
will the results be interpreted and fed back to the individuals, and how
will they be used?
These questions should be answered before the organization undertakes
the use of full-circle, multirater assessments. (Use the worksheet appearing in
Exhibit 8-2 to consider these questions.)
Advantages and Disadvantages of Full-Circle, Multirater Assessments
There are many advantages to full-circle, multirater assessments. They consolidate
feedback from many people surrounding an individual about his or her
present performance or future potential. The feedback alone is powerful in
creating an impetus for change and individual development. Moreover, the
ratings have much power in tapping into multiple perspectives, since (as the
old saying goes) ‘‘what you think depends on where you sit in the organization.’’
But there are disadvantages to full-circle, multirater assessments, and they
should be considered before the organization incurs the expense of using
them. First, these assessments can be expensive and are thus worthwhile only
when decision-makers know what they want and why they want it. Second, if
individuals are rated against criteria such as competencies or work require-

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
191
Exhibit 8-2. A Worksheet for Considering Key Issues in Full-Circle,
Multirater Assessments
Directions: When decision-makers begin thinking about using full-circle, multirater
assessment, there are many issues they should clarify at the outset.
Use this worksheet to help guide their thinking. For each question appearing in the
left column below, take notes about their answers in the right column. There are no
‘‘right’’ or ‘‘wrong’’ answers in any absolute sense, of course. But it is important to
clarify the answers to these questions.
Questions
1. Who will be assessed, and by whom
will they be assessed?
2. What will be assessed? Will it be
present performance, future
potential, or both?
3. When will the assessment occur?
4. Why is the assessment being
conducted?
5. How will the assessment be conducted?
(Will it be conducted online,
on paper, or by a combination?)
6. What will be done with the results,
how will the results be interpreted
and fed back to the individuals, and
how will they be used?
Answers
ments that are not unique to the corporate culture (as is true if off-the-shelf or
online instruments are used without modification), the results may not be too
useful or meaningful. In fact, the results may be misleading. After all, performance
and potential are influenced by the corporate cultural context in which
individuals perform. Third, when large numbers of people are subjected to
these assessments, the task of data analysis can be daunting. (Consider: one
person may have as many as twelve raters. If 100 people are subjected to assessment,
that means 1,200 ratings must be compiled and fed back individually.)
Feeding Back the Results of Full-Circle, Multirater Assessments
Since the last edition of this book was published, I have had ample opportunity
to conduct full-circle, multirater assessments during consulting engage-

192 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
ments. And one insight I have gained from those experiences is that it is not
so much the initial design of the assessment that is so important as it is the
feedback session that occurs after the assessment. When the full-circle, multirater
assessment of an individual is finished, what is done with that? That is
the key question, and it is worthy of some consideration.
The results of a full-circle, multirater assessments can be helpful in pinpointing
present performance gaps or future developmental gaps. The feedback
session—which can occur in a meeting conducted by an immediate
supervisor, HR professional, external consultant, or some combination of all
of these—must be well planned. The goal should be to establish a plan for
improvement (if the meeting focuses on present performance), an individual
learning plan (if the meeting focuses on future potential), or both.
Begin the meeting by presenting the results of the assessment. Start with
small talk to set the person at ease. (If you wish, provide the assessment to the
person before the meeting so that he or she has had time to study it.) Then
provide the feedback, hitting the high points. Walk the person through the
results and then offer interpretations. Be sure to mention strengths as well as
weaknesses. If you wish, you may ask the person what he or she believes the
results might mean, what could be done about them, and what actions should
be taken.
It is worth noting that individuals cannot necessarily identify the best strategies
for developing themselves for the future. That is input that the immediate
supervisor should provide and that is why it is worth having the immediate
supervisor in the room if the feedback session on the full-circle, multirater
assessment is provided by an HR professional or external consultant. The
immediate supervisor is best positioned to provide input about the corporateculture-specific
developmental assignments that could build essential competencies,
and the immediate supervisor is also best positioned to describe
specific situations that may explain an individual’s ratings. When the meeting
is over, a development plan should have been agreed to. It can then be filed
or placed on an online system for later review.
The Future of Full-Circle, Multirater Assessments
It is likely that full-circle, multirater assessment will only be used more frequently
in the future. For that reason, those managing SP&M programs should
become familiar with sources that describe how to establish and use them. 22
Appraising Performance and Applying Performance
Management
For an SP&M program to be effective, it must be based on information about
work requirements in key positions and about the performance of incumbents
and prospective successors. Hence, employee performance appraisal should

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
193
be an important source of information for SP&M. But what is performance
appraisal, and how should it be linked to SP&M?
Defining Performance Appraisal
Performance appraisal is the process of determining how well individuals are
meeting the work requirements of their jobs. Just as most organizations prepare
job descriptions to answer the question ‘‘What do people do?’’ most
organizations also prepare performance appraisals to answer the question
‘‘How well are people performing?’’ It is important to emphasize that performance
appraisals are properly viewed within the context of performance management,
23 which is the process of creating a work environment in which
people want to perform to their peak abilities and are encouraged to develop
themselves for the future. (See Exhibit 8-3.) Like so many terms in the HR field,
performance management can be a term in search of meaning and can refer
(variously) to after-the-fact performance appraisal, before-the-fact performance
planning, during-performance feedback, and the whole cycle of planning
for performance, identifying and knocking down performance barriers, providing
feedback during performance, and giving feedback upon the completion
of performance.
Performance appraisals are commonly used to justify pay raises, promotions,
and other employment decisions. They are also critically important for
SP&M, since few organizations will advance individuals into key positions
when they are not performing their present jobs adequately.
While a fixture of organizational life, employee performance appraisal has
not been immune to criticism. Indeed, it is rare to find managers who will
enthusiastically champion the performance appraisal practices of their organizations.
In recent years, appraisals have been increasingly prone to litigation. 24
Moreover, appraisals have been attacked by no less than the late curmudgeonly
guru of Total Quality Management, W. Edwards Deming. Deming faulted
employee performance appraisal for two primary reasons. First, Deming
believed that performance appraisal leads to management by fear. Second,
appraisal ‘‘encourages short-term performance at the expense of long-term
planning.’’ 25 It prompts people to look good in the short run, with potentially
devastating long-term organizational effects.
The central point of Deming’s argument is that people live up to the expectations
that their superiors have for them. That is the Pygmalion effect, which
takes its name from the ancient artist who fell in love with his own sculpted
creation of the woman Galatea. The Pygmalion effect asserts that managers
who believe that their employees are performing effectively will create a selffulfilling
prophecy. The underlying assumption, then, is that the world is influenced
by viewers’ beliefs about it.
When performance appraisal is conducted in a highly critical manner, it

194 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 8-3. The Relationship Between Performance Management and
Performance Appraisal
Performance management addresses this question: What is necessary to
encourage performance now and in the future?
Performance Management
(focuses on all aspects of the
work environment, work, and
worker that impact on
performance and can be past,
present, or future oriented)
Performance Appraisal
(usually focuses on past job
performance and is used to
make decisions on pay,
promotion, and other job
changes)
Performance appraisal addresses this question: How well are people
performing their jobs?
has the potential to demotivate and demoralize people. Indeed, research evidence
indicates that performance appraisal interviews focusing on ‘‘what people
are doing wrong’’ can actually lead to worse performance.
How Should Performance Appraisal Be Linked to Succession Planning
and Management?
Despite harsh attacks from critics, performance appraisal is likely to remain a
fixture of organizational life. One reason is that, despite their flaws, written
appraisals based on job-related performance criteria are superior to informal,
highly subjective appraisals at a time when employees are increasingly prone
to litigate. In the absence of written forms and formal procedures, managers
do not cease appraising employees; rather, they simply do it in a less struc-

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
195
tured fashion. Worse yet, they may face no requirement to provide employees
with feedback—with the result that they can never improve. Indeed, few can
dispute that employees will not improve their performance—or develop in
line with succession plans—if they have received no timely, concrete, and specific
feedback on how they are doing or what they should do to improve.
While annual performance appraisals are no substitute for daily feedback, they
should be used together to help employees develop. 26 Otherwise, the organization
will have no records of employee performance, other than the faulty
memories and unarticulated impressions of supervisors and other employees,
on which to base pay, promotion, transfer, or other decisions.
There are many approaches to performance appraisal, and much has been
written on the subject. 27 (Different types of appraisals are summarized in Exhibit
8-4.) To be effective, however, performance appraisal should be based as
closely as possible on the work that employees do. Used in conjunction with
individual potential assessments—which compare individuals to future job assignment
possibilities or future competencies—they can be a powerful tool
for employee improvement and development. For that reason, the best appraisal
is one that examines employee performance point-by-point to present
responsibilities of the present competencies.
One way to do that is to begin with a position description. Employees
should then be appraised against each activity. In this way, the organization
can maintain precise and detailed records of employee performance in each
facet of the individual’s job; and the individual will receive specific feedback
about how well he or she is performing. The problem is that such appraisals
can be time-consuming to write and conduct. And, in the case of individuals
who are performing poorly, their immediate superiors must take the time to
explain what needs to be improved and how it should be improved. To save
time, some organizations attempt to develop simple, easy-to-fill-out appraisals
to ease the paperwork burden on supervisors. Unfortunately, the easier an
appraisal is to fill out, the less useful it is in providing feedback to employees.
To solve that problem, try developing free-form appraisals that use job
descriptions themselves—or competencies—as the basis for appraisal. (See Exhibit
8-5 for a worksheet to help prepare such an appraisal.) Another approach
is to develop appraisals so that they are geared to future improvement rather
than past performance. In that way, they are focused less on what employees
are doing wrong and more on what they can do right. If that approach is
followed consistently, it can provide useful information to employees about
what they should do to prepare themselves for the future—and qualify for
succession.
Creating Talent Pools: Techniques and Approaches
A talent pool is a group of workers who are being prepared for vertical or
horizontal advancement. Vertical advancement usually means promotion up
(text continues on page 199)

196 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 8-4. Approaches to Conducting Employee Performance Appraisal
Approach Focus Brief Description
Global Rating Focuses on the individu- The appraiser is asked to charal’s
overall job perform- acterize an individual’s overall
ance.
job performance on a single
scale or in a single essay response.
Chief Advantage:
Appraisers can make responses
quickly.
Chief Disadvantage:
Performance is more complex
than a single rating can
indicate.
Trait Rating Focuses on traits related Appraisers are asked to charto
the individual’s per- acterize an individual’s job
formance. Examples of performance over a specific
traits might include ‘‘ini- time span using a series of
tiative’’ or ‘‘timeliness.’’ traits. Often, trait ratings are
scaled from ‘‘excellent’’
through ‘‘unacceptable.’’ The
appraiser is asked to check an
appropriate point on the scale.
However, traits can also be assessed
by an essay response in
which the appraiser is asked to
write a narrative about the individual’s
performance relative
to the trait.
Chief Advantage:
Appraisers can make responses
quickly.
Chief Disadvantage:
Traits can have different
meanings, so consistency of
rating and job-relatedness
of traits may be critical issues
to deal with.

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
197
Dimensions/ Focuses on each job ac- Think of a dimensional rating
Activity Rating tivity, duty, responsibility, as a ‘‘job description that has
or essential function. been given scales to assess
performance.’’ Appraisers are
asked to rate individual performance
on each job activity,
duty, responsibility, or essential
job function. Responses
may be provided by checking
a mark on a scale or by writing
an essay.
Chief Advantage:
This approach to appraisal
makes a deliberate effort to
tie performance appraisal to
job duties, thereby ensuring
job-relatedness.
Chief Disadvantage:
To work effectively, both appraiser
and performer must
agree in advance on the duties.
That means job descriptions
must be updated
regularly, and that can become
time-consuming.
Behaviorally Focuses on job behav- A BARS performance appraisal
Anchored iors—observable activ- typically consists of 5 to 10
Rating Scales ities—distinguishing vertical scales that are devel-
(BARS) exemplary from average oped through a critical inciperformers.
dent process to distinguish
effective from ineffective performance.
Each scale represents
actual performance. A
BARS rating system is often
compatible with a competency-based
approach.
Chief Advantage:
Since each BARS is tied directly
to job activities, this
approach to performance
(continues)

198 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 8-4. (continued)
Approach Focus Brief Description
appraisal enjoys high face
validity. It can also lead to
improved job performance
by clarifying for performers
exactly what behavior is desirable
and undesirable.
Chief Disadvantage:
To work effectively, BARS requires
considerable time
and effort to devise. That
can exceed the resources—or
commitment—of
many
organizations.
Management Focuses on the results of Before the appraisal period
by Objectives job performance rather begins, the appraiser and per-
(MBO) than processes to former jointly agree upon job
achieve results.
results desired. At the end of
the appraisal period, the results
are compared to the objectives
established at the
outset of the appraisal period.
Chief Advantages:
The focus is on results rather
than on methods of achieving
them. Both appraiser
and performer are involved
in establishing performance
objectives.
Chief Disadvantages:
For the appraiser and performer
to reach agreement,
much time may be required.
Writing performance objectives
can turn the process
into a ‘‘paper mill.’’

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
199
Exhibit 8-5. A Worksheet for Developing an Employee Performance
Appraisal Linked to a Position Description
Directions: Use this worksheet to develop a ‘‘free-form’’ employee performance appraisal
that is based specifically on the position description. In the left column below,
indicate what the position description indicates are the duties, activities, responsibilities,
key result areas, competencies, or essential job functions. Then, in the right
column, indicate how performance in the position may be measured.
What are the position’s activities,
duties, responsibilities? (List them from
an up-to-date position description.)
How should performance be measured
for each activity, duty, or responsibility?
(Indicate appropriate ways to measure
successful performance.)
the organization’s chain of command. Of course, in recent years, promotions
have been diminishing in number. Horizontal advancement usually means
that the individual’s competencies are enhanced so that he or she has a
broader scope of knowledge, skills, and abilities in keeping with the organization’s
direction or his or her occupation.
The use of talent pools is one reason that SP&M is different from replacement
planning. Instead of identifying only one or several backups for key positions,
as is common in replacement planning, the idea of talent pools is to
create as many backups as possible among people who are willing to develop
themselves. (Of course, there are cost-benefit implications to committing to
talent pools. Organizational leaders should not promise them if they are not
willing to pay for them.)
To create talent pools, organizations should possess competency models
by departments, job categories, hierarchical levels, or occupations. The competency
models may describe present competencies or desired future competencies.
Also important, as described in Chapter 4, are value statements that
indicate desired corporate values or desired ethical conduct.

200 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Begin the process of creating a talent pool by clarifying targeted groups.
Answer such questions as these:
▲ Who is included?
▲ What is a talent pool? How many talent pools should exist in the organization?
▲ When is each talent pool to be formed?
▲ Where is each talent pool to be located? (What is its geographical
scope?)
▲ Why is each talent pool desirable?
▲ How will the talent pool be analyzed for current bench strength and
desired future bench strength, and how will the status of each talent
pool be tracked and assessed?
▲ How will individuals in the talent pool be developed for the future?
There are as many ways to define talent pools as there are to define competency
models. In other words, it is possible to have talent pools by department,
by hierarchical level on the organization’s chain of command, by job category,
by region, by occupation, and by other means.
It is worth emphasizing that, if talent pools are formed, no one person
should be designated as a successor for a key position. Instead, the logic is
that all people in the talent pool will be developed in line with present and
future organizational and individual needs. To be effective, a talent pool
should be paired with competency models, appropriate performance management
practices to encourage individual development and performance, appropriate
potential assessment strategies, and appropriate developmental efforts.
When a vacancy occurs, the individuals compete. Instead of giving the job to
those with the longest time in position or those who are personal favorites of
immediate supervisors, individuals are then prepared to compete on the basis
of demonstrated track records in performing their work and developing themselves.
Thinking Beyond Talent Pools
It is an intriguing question to ask ‘‘What is beyond talent pools?’’ After all,
some organizational leaders have not even committed to develop everyone
who is willing to be developed, which is the fundamental philosophy that
underlies talent pooling. But for those organizations that have committed to
talent pooling and have had some experience with it, opportunities may exist
to push the concept further.
One way to do that is to move away from thinking about developing people
to meet the minimum requirements for positions. 28 Instead, a goal may be to
leverage the talent base of the organization by developing people to the level
of exemplary performers. (Of course, that assumes that organizational leaders

Assessing Present Work Requirements and Individual Job Performance
201
know who the exemplary performers are, based on objective performance
measures rather than perceptions that may be biased.) To clarify the point by
example, suppose the organization commits to develop supervisors to department
managers. Any supervisor who wishes to join a program for that purpose
is participating in a talent pooling effort. But suppose the organization’s leaders
decide that they do not want to ‘‘set the bar’’ at the lowest level needed to
qualify for consideration but rather at the highest level. To that end, they will
need to know what distinguishes the best-in-class (exemplary) department
managers from those who are merely fully successful.
Why would an organization’s leaders commit to do this? The answer seems
clear. Exemplary performers may be as much as twenty times more productive
than their fully successful counterparts. If the organization could get more
exemplary performers, then the organization would be more competitive, efficient,
and effective.
There is yet another possible way to move beyond talent pooling. Many
talent pooling efforts focus only on building job competencies. But if that
notion is expanded to include psychological assessments, individual career
planning, and value modeling efforts, the notion of ‘‘development’’ can move
beyond mere preparation for work to betterment of the person as a person.
Psychological assessment, in particular, seems to be the focus of much
attention. ‘‘Psychologist Robert Hogan has administered personality tests to
well over a million people in the past three decades and claims that at least 55
percent of managers in American corporations are unfit for their jobs,’’ writes
Kaihla. ‘‘That may explain why his company, Hogan Assessment Systems, and
many major test vendors are reporting double-digit growth this year over last.
Business is booming for the headshrinkers.’’ 29
Growing awareness exists, and is bolstered by thinking from the competency
movement, that it is as much the person in the job as it is the work he
or she is to do that is so important. That has prompted organizations to rely
on a growing number of psychological assessments to help make or support
employment decisions, including succession decisions. 30 The danger, of
course, is that psychological assessments, or assessments like the Myers Briggs
Type Indicator (MBTI), will be improperly used by poorly trained people—or
will be used as the only reason to ‘‘rule people out’’ for promotions for which
they may otherwise be well qualified. A good strategy is to look for instruments,
like the Hogan (see www.hoganassessments.com/HPI.aspx) or the Neo
(see www.rpp.on.ca/neopir.htm), that are based on the Big Five personality
characteristics. Those assessments should be administered and interpreted
only by people who know what they are doing. And HR practitioners should
train managers how to use personality assessments in combination with other
methods of assessment to examine an individual’s likelihood of success in a
future position. For more information on personality assessment, check out
such Web sites as www.acsu.buffalo.edu/stmeier/c6.html and www.erin
.utoronto.ca/w3psyuli/PSY230/PSY230Notes07.htm.

202 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
This section was meant to stimulate some thought. What could be done to
move beyond talent pooling to achieve quantum leaps in improvement? I have
offered several ideas. Perhaps you have some as well.
Summary
This chapter has emphasized present conditions. More specifically, it addressed
the following questions:
▲ What are the organization’s key positions?
▲ What are the work requirements or competencies required in key positions?
▲ How should individual performance be appraised?
▲ What methods should be used to keep track of the organization’s work
requirements and individual performance?
The next chapter focuses on anticipating future conditions as essential in succession
planning and management. It thus discusses how to identify future
work requirements in key positions and how to assess individual potential.

C H A P T E R 9
ASSESSING FUTURE WORK
REQUIREMENTS AND
INDIVIDUAL POTENTIAL
Having information about present work requirements or competencies and
individual job performance provides only a one-dimensional picture. To make
the picture complete—and thus provide the basis for systematic succession
planning and management (SP&M)—information is also needed about future
work requirements and individual potential. 1 Hence, this chapter focuses on
assessing future work requirements and individual potential. More specifically,
the chapter addresses these questions:
▲ What key positions and talent requirements are likely to emerge in the
organization’s future?
▲ What will be the work requirements in those positions?
▲ What is individual potential, and how should it be assessed?
Identifying Key Positions and Talent Requirements for the
Future
Neither key positions nor their work requirements will remain forever static.
The reason, of course, is that organizations are constantly in flux in response
to pressures exerted internally and externally. As a result, SP&M coordinators
need to identify future key positions and determine future work requirements
if they are to be successful in preparing individuals to assume key positions.
They must, in a sense, cope with a moving-target effect in which work requirements,
key positions, and even high-potential employees are changing. 2
But how can they be certain what positions will be key to the organization
in the future? Unfortunately, the unsettling fact is that no foolproof way exists
to predict key positions. About the best that can be done is to conduct careful
reviews of changes in work and people, and draw some conclusions about the
likely consequences of change.
203

204 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Applying Environmental Scanning
As a first step in predicting key positions in the future, begin by applying environmental
scanning. This can be understood as a systematic process of examining
external trends. 3 Focus attention on economic, governmental/legal,
technological, social, geographical, and other issues and trends affecting the
organization’s external environment. (Use the worksheet in Exhibit 9-1 for this
purpose.) For best results, involve decision-makers in this process, since key
positions in the future should reflect the organization’s strategic plans and
changing work processes.
Applying Organizational Analysis
As a second step in predicting key positions in the future, turn next to organizational
analysis. This is the systematic process of examining how an organization
is positioning itself to address future challenges. 4 It can also be
understood as any effort made to assess an organization’s strengths and weaknesses.
Consider the following questions:
▲ How well positioned is the organization presently to respond to the
effects of future trends?
▲ What action steps can the organization take to meet the threats and
opportunities posed by future trends?
▲ How can the organization maximize its strengths and minimize its weaknesses
as the future unfolds in the present?
As these questions are answered, pay particular attention to likely changes in
(1) organizational structure (What will be the reporting relationships? How
will divisions, departments, work units, and jobs be designed?), and (2) work
processes (How will work flow into each part of the organization? What will be
done with it? Where will the work flow to?).
Structure and processes are important issues because key positions result
from decisions made about how to structure responsibility and organize the
work process. 5 To direct attention to likely key positions in the future, then,
decision-makers should examine how the organization will respond to external
pressures by structuring responsibility and organizing work processes. Key
positions will emerge—and old ones will fade—based on the way the organization
chooses to respond to environmental demands. Use the activity appearing
in Exhibit 9-2 to help decision-makers address these issues.
Preparing Realistic Future Scenarios
As a third and final step in predicting key positions in the future, compare
the results obtained from environmental scanning and organizational analysis.

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
205
Exhibit 9-1. A Worksheet for Environmental Scanning
Directions: What trends evident in the external environment will affect the organization
in the future? Answering that question should prove valuable in strategic business
planning, human resource planning, and succession planning. Environmental
scanning attempts to identify those trends—and, more important, to predict their
effects.
Use this simple worksheet to structure your thinking about trends that will affect your
organization in the future and what their effects are likely to be. Answer each question
appearing in the worksheet below. Then compare your responses to what other
decision-makers in the organization have written.
1. What trends outside the organization are most likely to affect it in the next 1–5
years? Consider economic conditions, market conditions, financial conditions,
regulatory/legal conditions, technological conditions, social conditions, and
other trends that might uniquely affect the organization.
List of trends likely to affect the organization:
2. For each trend you listed in response to question 1 above, indicate how you
think that trend will affect the organization. Describe the trend’s possible consequence(s),
outcome(s), or result(s). (While you may not be able to do that with
complete certainty, try to gaze into the crystal ball and predict what will happen
as a result of a trend.)
List effects/consequences:

206 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 9-2. An Activity on Organizational Analysis
Directions: How will your organization respond to the trends evident in the external
environment that will likely affect it in the future? Use this worksheet to help you
structure your thinking about how external environmental trends will affect work in
the organization.
Obtain answers to the activity appearing in Exhibit 9-1. Then answer each question
appearing in the worksheet below. Finally, compare your responses to what other
decision-makers write. Use the responses to consider future work requirements in
the organization.
1. For each consequence, outcome, or result you listed in response to question 2
in Exhibit 9-1, indicate what functions/positions in the organization are most
likely to be affected and how you think those functions/positions will be—or
should be—affected.
List each consequence, outcome,
or result.
Describe what functions/positions are
most likely to be affected and how you
think they will be—or should be—
affected.
2. How should the organization respond to future trends? Should workflow
change? Should work methods change? Should the organization’s structure
change? Are any changes likely as a response to increasing external competitive
pressure? How does the organization’s strategic plan indicate that those challenges
will be met? Will new key positions emerge as a result of changes to
organizational strategy? Will old key positions fade in importance while new
ones become more important? Will new competencies be required, and (if so)
what are they and where will they need to be demonstrated?
Provide your thoughts:

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
207
Draw an organization chart as decision-makers believe it should appear in the
future. Write the expected future mission of each organizational function on
the chart. (Make several versions of that chart at different future time intervals—at,
say, one year, three years, five years, and ten years into the future.)
Then add the names of possible leaders and their successors.
This process is called preparing realistic future scenarios. It is based on
the process of scenario analysis, which has been widely applied to futures
research and strategic planning. 6 Use the activity appearing in Exhibit 9-3 to
help decision-makers structure their thinking in preparing realistic scenarios
to identify future key positions. While not foolproof or failsafe, this approach
is one way to move beyond traditional thinking about SP&M to ‘‘lead’’ the
target—what hunters do when they shoot ahead of a moving target.
Three Approaches to Determining Future Work Requirements in Key
Positions
Determining future work requirements means predicting possible or probable
work activities, duties, and responsibilities in future key positions. Once likely
future key positions have been identified, direct attention to predicting work
or competency requirements for those positions. Move beyond present- or pastoriented
descriptions to assess future work or competency requirements in key
positions. To that end, apply one or more of the three approaches described
below.
1. Future-Oriented Job and Task Analysis
To conduct future-oriented job and task analysis for key positions, focus attention
on summarizing expected future activities, responsibilities, duties, or essential
functions. 7 Extend the analysis by examining future tasks linked to
those activities, responsibilities, duties, or essential job functions. Write position
descriptions as they should exist at a future time if the organization is to
be successful in meeting the competitive challenges it faces. In this way, the
effects of organizational strategic plans on key positions can be mirrored, and
thereby aligned, in position descriptions and task inventories. By comparing
present and future position descriptions, decision-makers should be able to
uncover important disparities—and, accordingly, information about desirable
developmental opportunities to groom individuals for advancement. Use the
activity appearing in Exhibit 9-4 to prepare future-oriented key position descriptions.
However, future-oriented position descriptions are no panacea. They are
prone to the same disadvantages as traditional (present-oriented) position descriptions:
(1) a focus on activities, not results; (2) a lack of details about all
elements essential to job success, including personal characteristics and attitudes;
and (3) a requirement for continual, and time-consuming, revision because
they date so rapidly. Additionally, they may be based on inaccurate (or

208 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 9-3. An Activity for Preparing Realistic Scenarios to Identify Future
Key Positions
Directions: The future can seem difficult to envision if predictions about it are left
vague. Use this activity to make predictions more tangible. Using responses to questions
appearing in Exhibits 9-1 and 9-2, create a detailed description of the likely
future situation of your organization at the end of 5 years from the present. Do
that by answering the questions appearing below. When you finish answering the
questions, compare what you wrote to what other key decision-makers/strategists
have written. Develop an overall scenario that describes the ‘‘best-guess situation’’
of the way the future will appear for the organization.
1. What is your ‘‘best guess’’ of how the organization will be functioning in 1 to 5
years, based on environmental scanning or organizational diagnosis? Describe
the organization’s situation, competition, profitability, and structure:
2. What positions do you believe will be key (that is, critically important) in 1 to 5
years? List their job titles below. What competencies will incumbents in those
positions need to possess/demonstrate to be successful?
simply wrongheaded) assumptions about the future. However, such disadvantages
may be outweighed by their specificity and by helping individuals to
envision the future into which they—and their organizations—are headed.
2. Future Competency Models
Competency modeling lends itself to a future orientation better than any other
approach. 8 To give a future orientation to competency models, simply direct
attention to the future rather than to the present or past. Ask the organization’s
strategists to review each key position for underlying employee characteristics
(including motives, traits, skills, self-image, social roles, or bodies of
knowledge), which should, if assumptions about the future prove correct, simultaneously
result in superior performance and actions consistent with orga-

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
209
Exhibit 9-4. An Activity for Preparing Future-Oriented Key Position
Descriptions
Directions: An organization’s strategic plans can seem vague to employees—and
even to strategists—until they are made job-specific. Use this activity to help clarify
how key positions should change to help the organization realize strategic goals
and implement strategic business plans.
In the left column below, list current job activities for each key position. Then, using
the results of Exhibits 9-1, 9-2, and 9-3, list how those job activities should change
between the present and 1 to 5 years in the future for the job incumbent to function
in line with expected environmental trends and organizational changes made to
cope with them.
Ask each key job incumbent to complete this activity for his/her position. Then ask
strategists to review the results of the activity for each key position in the organization
and identify the competencies needed. Use the results as a basis for future-oriented
succession planning.
Current Job Activities for
Each Key Position
How Should These Activities Be
Carried Out in 1–5 Years, and What
Competencies Should Job Incumbents
Possess/Demonstrate?
nizational strategy. Apply competency modeling approaches with an emphasis
on future, rather than past or present, competencies. Then use the resulting
competency models as a guide to prepare individuals for advancement into
key positions.
Alas, however, future competencies may not be identical to present or past
competencies. Indeed, they may even conflict with them. For instance, think
about such examples as IBM after downsizing or AT&T after deregulation. In
each case, what was required for future success was not what had been historically
required—or even desired—by the organization. That created a dilemma.

210 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Managers who succeeded under the old conditions were suddenly outmoded
and were even unfit to counsel a new generation about what it would take for
them to succeed. In these settings, managers had to identify—and cultivate—
talent that was quite different from their own if their organizations were to
survive. Exemplary future competence, then, represents a moving target, an
ideal, a description of what people will probably have to know, do, or feel to
perform successfully amid the vague uncertainties of the future. 9
Future-oriented competency models, like future-oriented position descriptions,
suffer from the same strengths and weaknesses as their traditional counterparts.
While more rigorous than job analysis, a competency model can be
confusing to those who do not clearly understand what it is. Additionally,
future-oriented competency models usually require considerable time and expertise
to carry out successfully. That may require strategists to devote significant
time and resources to it, which they may be reluctant to do.
3. Future-Oriented Rapid Results Assessment
This approach to competency identification has very real potential to help
decision-makers plan for future work requirements in key positions. Nor does
it require substantial expertise, time, or resources to carry out. To use it, simply
focus attention on desirable future competencies. Apply the steps depicted
in Exhibit 9-5. Then use those steps to examine competencies in each key
position in the organization. Use the results as the basis to plan for individual
development and organizational SP&M generally. 10
Rapid results assessment enjoys important advantages: It can be conducted
quickly; it enjoys high face validity because it uses experienced and exemplary
job incumbents (or other knowledgeable people) on which to base positionspecific
information; it permits the personal involvement of key decisionmakers,
thereby building their ownership in the results; and it can be used to
move beyond a focus on mere work activities or tasks to include descriptions
of underlying characteristics or work outputs. However, it shares the disadvantages
of its traditional counterpart: The results are not as rigorous nor as complete
as other competency modeling methods, and the results are heavily
dependent on the credibility of the individual panelists. Additionally, as in
other future-oriented approaches, it is only as good as the assumptions about
the future on which it is based.
Assessing Individual Potential: The Traditional Approach
The centerpiece of most SP&M programs is some means by which to assess
individual potential. This effort seeks to determine how to make best use of
the organization’s existing human resource assets. However, assessing future
potential should not be confused with appraising present job performance.
Performance appraisal is linked to present job performance; potential assessment
is linked to future advancement possibilities. Potential assessment is a
critically important activity, if only because as many as one-third of all leader-

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
211
Exhibit 9-5. Steps in Conducting Future-Oriented ‘‘Rapid
Results Assessment’’
Step 1 Assemble a group of 5–13 knowledgeable
Orient the committee to
individuals—including exemplary job incumthe
rapid results assess-
bents and their immediate exemplary superiors.
ment procedure.
Brief group members on the need to predict
changing work requirements.
Step 2 Assemble information about one or more
Review current information specific key jobs/positions in the organizaabout
the job/occupation/ tion.
function.
Focus attention in this step on ‘‘what job in-
cumbents do now.’’
Step 3 Brief group members on trends in the external
Review external environchange—or
require change—in job duties,
environment and the organization that may
mental factors affecting
the organization and likely activities, responsibilities, tasks, competen-
ways the organization will cies, or essential job functions.
respond to them.
Step 4 Ask group members to identify how they believe
key positions will be affected by chang-
Identify specific activities
that are likely to be carried ing external environmental conditions.
out in the key position in
Go around the meeting room and ask each
the future.
group member to list an activity that he or she
envisions will be carried out in the future—
and continue this process until group members
exhaust ideas.
Step 5 Ask group members to review the activities
Review and refine the
they defined in the previous step, eliminating
future-oriented task and
redundancy and identifying names for gen-
activity statements.
eral categories.
Step 6 Ask group members to sequence the futureoriented
task and activity statements they
Sequence future-oriented
task and activity statearranged
from easiest to most difficult to
identified in the previous step so that they are
ments.
learn.
(continues)

212 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 9-5. (continued)
Step 7 Develop a ‘‘matrix’’ on a sheet of paper that
Construct a ‘‘futureganized
by category and arranged from easi-
depicts future-oriented tasks and activities ororiented
task and activity’’
matrix.
est to most difficult to learn.
Step 8 Review each task/activity on the matrix and
Examine the appropriate
ask group members to identify appropriate
‘‘affective domain’’ isthat
are properly associated with each task/
competencies/feelings/value orientations
sues for each futureactivity.
oriented task and activity
statement.
Step 9 Review each task/activity on the matrix and
Examine appropriate perways
to measure/assess/appraise perform-
ask group members to identify appropriate
formance standards for
each future-oriented task ance relative to the future-oriented task or ac-
and activity statement on tivity.
the matrix.
Step 10 Use the results of the rapid results assessment
Establish procedures by
to position succession planning on a futurewhich
to use the matrix for oriented, rather than present- or past-
selecting, appraising, assessing
potential, and
oriented, footing.
other important activities.
ship positions (it has been estimated) would not be filled by present incumbents
if decision-makers had it to do over again. 11
What Is Individual Potential Assessment?
Individual potential assessment is a systematic process of examining individuals’
possibilities for job change or movement. It is usually associated with determining
whether individuals ‘‘have what it takes’’ to advance to positions of
greater management responsibility or positions demanding greater technical
knowledge. It should be linked to—and serve as one basis for determining—
employee training, education, and development activities, which (collectively)

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
213
represent a vehicle to help an individual qualify for advancement. 12 It should
also be linked to individual career planning activities, which have (unfortunately)
been deemphasized in recent years owing to widespread downsizing
and economic restructuring.
What Is a High Potential?
The term high potential has more than one possible meaning. High potentials,
who should be identified through the individual potential assessment process,
represent the organization’s inventory of future leaders. They are usually individuals
who are capable of advancing two or more levels beyond their present
placement, individuals who are slated for key positions, or those who have not
reached a career plateau. (Other definitions are also possible. 13 ) It is important
to define the term in a way unique to each organization. In fact, each organization
may have several definitions.
Distinguishing Between Exemplary Performers and High Potentials
Individuals who are high potentials are almost always exemplary performers
who are identified through the performance appraisal process and who exceed
minimum job expectations. Exceptional performance in the current job is usually
a necessary prerequisite to advancement. 14 However, not all exemplary
performers are high potentials because advancement potential is based on
different criteria from present performance.
In any organization or organizational unit, individuals may be classified
into four distinct groups based on their performance and their potential. To
that end, think of a grid with two axes. 15 (See Exhibit 9-6.) One axis represents
present performance and is divided between high and low performance; the
second axis represents future potential and is divided between high and low
potential. The result is a performance/potential grid that closely resembles the
Boston Consulting Group’s widely used portfolio analysis technique for use in
strategic planning. It is also a method for making investments decisions.
As shown in Exhibit 9-6, stars (see the upper left cell of the performance/
potential grid) are exemplary individual performers in their present positions.
They are also perceived to have high potential for future advancement. 16 A
major corporate asset, they are properly regarded as high potentials and are a
source of replacements for key positions. An effective HR strategy for stars
involves a twofold effort to make the most of their current performance while
systematically preparing them for advancement—and even accelerating their
development, if possible. Above all, the organization should make every effort
to seek to recruit and retain them, keeping their turnover minimal.
Workhorses (see the upper right cell of the performance/potential grid) are
exemplary performers in their current jobs who are perceived to have poor

214 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 9-6. How to Classify Individuals by Performance and Potential
The Performance/Potential Grid
Future Potential
High
Low
Present
Performance
High Stars Workhorses
HR strategy:
Keep turnover low. Keep turnover low.
Take steps to acceler- Keep them motivated
ate their development. and productive where
they are.
Low Question Marks Deadwood
HR strategy:
Convert them to stars. Convert them to work-
Counsel them to ac- horses.
celerate their develop- Terminate them if they
ment.
cannot be salvaged.
Source: George S. Odiorne, Strategic Management of Human Resources: A Portfolio Approach (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1984), p. 305. Adapted with permission of the publisher.
future potential. 17 Since they are highly productive where they are, they should
remain there. An effective strategy for workhorses is to harness their skills
while keeping them motivated and productive. Turnover in their ranks, as with
stars, should be kept minimal.
Question marks (see the lower left cell of the performance/potential grid)
are poor performers in their present positions who are perceived to have high
future potential. 18 The best HR strategy for dealing with them is to focus on
improving their present performance, thereby turning them into stars. Their
immediate supervisors should be trained to apply appropriate techniques—
such as coaching, mentoring, and (when warranted) corrective action steps—to
make them more productive.
Finally, deadwood (see the lower right cell of the performance/potential
grid) consists of individuals who are neither good performers in their present
jobs nor perceived to have future advancement potential. 19 While their ranks
may have been dramatically reduced in the 1990s owing to downsizing and
other reductions in force, their ranks may be swollen in some international
subsidiaries where the national culture emphasizes good relationships between
bosses and subordinates rather than performance (results).
A twofold HR strategy is most effective with deadwood. First, their immediate
organizational superiors should make every effort to help them improve

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
215
their present performance. If successful, that strategy will convert deadwood
to workhorses. If unsuccessful, that strategy should be followed up by fair and
even-handed efforts, consistent with the organization’s disciplinary policies
and practices, to move them out of the job—or even out of the organization.
Identifying High Potentials
How can the organization identify high potentials? There are several ways to
answer that question because approaches to assessing individual potential are
as diverse as employee performance appraisal, and sometimes resemble each
other.
Global Assessment
One way to assess potential is to ask senior executives to furnish the names of
individuals in their areas of responsibility who they feel have high potential
according to the definition established in the organization. This is called global
assessment. (See Exhibit 9-7 for a sample worksheet to be used in making
global assessments.)
It is a simple approach, but it is not very effective, for several reasons. First,
few senior executives (except those in very small organizations) will know
everyone in their areas of responsibility. Second, unless the definition of ‘‘high
potential’’ is made quite clear, senior executives are likely to respond to a
request for names based on their perceptions. Those perceptions about individuals
can be colored too much by recent events (recency bias), extremely
bad incidents (the horn effect), or extremely good incidents (the halo effect).
Indeed, perceptions can lead to personal favoritism, discrimination, or pigeonholing
in which individual potential is difficult to change once assessed.
Success Factor Analysis
A second approach to individual potential assessment is based on success factor
analysis, the process of examining traits or other characteristics perceived
to lead to organizational success or advancement. One research study, for instance,
revealed that successful women share such characteristics as exemplary
educational credentials, a track record of hard work and good performance,
supportive mentoring relationships, effective interpersonal skills, and a willingness
to take career and work risks. 20
Success factors may be identified through various means. One way is to ask
executives what traits they think will lead to success in the organization. These
traits may then be collected in the way depicted in Exhibit 9-8. Executives can
be asked to check off what they believe those traits are. Lists completed by
numerous executives may be compiled and used as the basis for developing

216 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 9-7. A Worksheet for Making Global Assessments
Directions: Use this worksheet to list individuals whom you consider to be ‘‘highpotentials’’
in your organizational area of responsibility. A ‘‘high-potential’’ is an
individual who has the capacity to be promoted two or more levels. List the names
below, provide their present titles, and the time they have spent in the present positions.
Be prepared to discuss, in the future, why you believe these individuals have
the capacity to be promoted two or more levels. If possible, rank them by their
potential—with 1 highest potential. (Do not use current position as a basis for
ranking; rather, use your judgment about individual ability to perform at a higher
level.)
Names Titles Time in Present Positions
an individual potential assessment form, perhaps like the one shown in Exhibit
9-9.
An alternative is to conduct critical incident interviews with organizational
strategists. This approach is based on critical incident analysis, which has been
used in training needs assessment. Critical incidents were first identified for
pilots during World War II. They were asked what situations (incidents), if
ignored, might lead to serious (critical) consequences.
If this approach is used, individual interviews should be conducted with
strategists with a structured interview guide like the one shown in Exhibit 9-8.
The results should then be analyzed and become the basis for establishing
success factors. These, in turn, can be used in assessing individual potential
and, when appropriate, identifying developmental opportunities.
Three Approaches to Individual Potential Assessment
There are three basic approaches to assessing individual potential. Each is
based on a different philosophy. They are worth reviewing.

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
217
Exhibit 9-8. A Worksheet to Identify Success Factors
Directions: Use this worksheet to identify success factors. A ‘‘success factor’’ is a
past experience or personal characteristic linked to, and correlated with, successful
advancement in the organization. Identify success factors by asking individuals who
have already achieved success—such as key position incumbents—about their most
important developmental experiences and about what they did (or skills they demonstrated)
in the midst of those experiences.
Pose the following questions to key position incumbents. Then compile and compare
the results. Ask other key position incumbents in the organization to review the results.
1. What is the single most difficult experience you encountered in your career?
(Describe the situation below.)
2. What did you do in the experience you described in response to question 1?
(Describe, as precisely as you can, what actions you took—and what results you
achieved as a result.)
3. Reflect on your answer to question 2. What personal characteristics do you feel
you exhibited or demonstrated in the action(s) you took? How do you feel they
contributed to your present success?
Leader-Driven Individual Potential Assessment
The first approach might be called leader-driven. It is the traditional approach
that was probably first used in business. Individual potential is assessed by the
organization’s strategists—and often solely by key position incumbents for
their own subordinates in their immediate areas of responsibility.
The process may be a formal one, in which the organization has established
forms for this purpose that are completed periodically on all employees
or on a select group of employees (such as those designated as high potentials).
Alternatively, the process may be informal: Each function or organiza-

218 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
Exhibit 9-9. An Individual Potential Assessment Form
Directions: Individual potential may be assessed through many different approaches.
One approach is to ask their immediate organizational superiors to rate
employees—particularly those felt to be high-potentials—against various success
factors, skills, competencies, values, or abilities that are felt to be correlated with
future success at a higher level of responsibility.
Ask key job incumbents to rate their subordinates on each of the following generic
success factors. (It is better to use success factors specific to the unique organizational
culture.) A separate form should be completed on each high-potential. The
completed forms may then be used as one source of information about individual
strengths/weaknesses.
Ask the raters to place an x in the appropriate spot in the right column below the
scale and opposite the success factor listed in the left column. Then ask raters to
send their completed forms to the HR Department or to the organization’s Succession
Planning Coordinator. There are no ‘‘right’’ or ‘‘wrong’’ answers in any absolute
sense. However, raters may vary in their potential assessments, depending on how
they interpret the success factors and the rating scale.
Success Factors
Scale
(or competencies Needs Exceeds
needed at a Improvement Adequate Requirements
targeted level) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Appraising
Budgeting
Communicating
Controlling
Dealing with Change
Developing Employees
Influencing Others
Making Changes
Making Decisions
Managing Projects
Effectively
Organizing
Planning
Representing the
Organization
Effectively
Staffing the Unit/
Department

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
219
tional unit is asked to submit names of individuals who have advancement
potential.
This approach is characterized by secrecy. Employees have little or no say
in the process; indeed, they are not always aware that it is being carried out.
No effort is made to double-check individual potential assessment results with
individual career aspirations or plans to ensure that an appropriate match exists.
An advantage of this approach is that it can be done quickly. Leaders
simply fill out forms and return them to the human resources department, the
SP&M coordinator, or a designated executive. Employees do not challenge the
results because they are unaware of what they are. The organization thus retains
strong control over SP&M and its results.
A disadvantage of this approach, however, is that employees have no stake
in outcomes they did not help to shape. If the results are ever used in making
succession decisions, employees may refuse promotions or transfers that conflict
with their perceptions of their own desired work-life balance or their own
career goals.
Participative Individual Potential Assessment
A second approach might be called participative assessment. Both individuals
and their immediate organizational superiors enact important roles in the assessment
process. Hence, it is participative. Periodically—such as once a
year—employees undergo an individual potential assessment. It may be timed
at the halfway point of the annual performance appraisal cycle so that potential
assessment is not confused with performance appraisal.
Although there are many ways to carry out the process, one approach involves
distributing individual assessment appraisal forms to employees and
their immediate organizational superiors. Employees and superiors complete
the forms, exchange them, and later meet to discuss the individual’s advancement
capabilities. As with performance appraisals, the forms for individual
potential assessment are usually prepared by the human resources department,
distributed from that department, and the results returned to that department
for filing in personnel records. (Alternatives to that approach are
possible. For instance, completed individual assessment appraisal forms may
be retained by the leader of each organizational unit.)
An advantage of this approach is that it allows ‘‘reality testing.’’ Individuals
learn of possibilities for the future, which may interest them and motivate
them; organizational representatives learn more about individual career goals
and aspirations, thereby improving the quality of their succession plans. In
this way, the assessment process provides an opportunity for mutual candor
and information-sharing.
Key to this process is the individual potential assessment interview. It
should be carried out in a quiet, supportive setting that is free of interruptions.
The employee’s immediate organizational superior should set the pace, dis-

220 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
cussing his or her perceptions about the individual’s strengths and weaknesses
for advancement—and the realistic possibilities for that advancement. Having
an agenda can make an interview of this kind run smoothly. Another advantage
is that employees have a stake in the assessment process. If the organization
should have a need to make a succession decision, the likelihood is greater
that employees will accept offers of promotions or transfers that match their
career goals and organizational needs.
A disadvantage of this approach is that it can rarely be done quickly. Leaders
and employees must devote time to it if it is to be valuable. Indeed, to gain
the full benefits from it, leaders must be trained on effective interviewing skills.
Another disadvantage is that the value of participative assessment is a function
of the interpersonal trust existing between leaders and their employees. However,
trust is not always present, nor is complete candor.
Several factors affect trust. Among them are past dealings between the organization
and individual; the perceived candor of the organization’s representative;
and the match between individual career goals and organizational
opportunities. To cite two examples, suppose that an employee has personal
aspirations that may eventually lead to her departure from the organization.
She may be unwilling to share that information for fear of how it might affect
her prospects for promotion. Likewise, leaders may be unable to share information
about pending changes affecting the organization—such as the sale of
a division or the dissolution of a product line—that may also impact career
goals or succession plans.
Empowered Individual Potential Assessment
In this third approach, leaders provide guidance and direction but do not
determine the outcomes or make final decisions affecting individual potential.
Instead, they just share information and offer coaching suggestions. Individuals
remain chiefly responsible for their own self-assessment and their own selfdevelopment.
Once a year, employees are encouraged to complete individual potential
assessment forms, share them with their immediate organizational superiors,
and then schedule meetings to discuss them with their superiors. (Some may
even decide to discuss their forms with their mentors.) The form is usually
created and supplied by the human resources department. However, it may—or
may not—be called an individual potential assessment form. Alternative names
might include career planning assessment form or individual development
planning form (see Exhibit 9-9). In this approach, the initiative rests entirely
with employees. They conduct their own individual assessments; they schedule
assessment meetings with their immediate organizational superiors or with
mentors in other parts of the organization; they are not required to participate
in the assessment process, which remains voluntary. As with other approaches,
however, it is usually kept separate from performance appraisals so as not to

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
221
confuse present performance and future potential. Individual potential assessment
becomes a tool to help individuals understand how to qualify for advancement
within the framework of the organization’s needs and their own
career goals.
An advantage of this approach is that, like other empowerment efforts, it
can be quite motivating to employees. Further, it discourages a philosophy of
entitlement in which employees with a long service record feel that promotions
are ‘‘owed’’ to them. Instead, the responsibility for advancement rests
squarely on their shoulders, and they are expected to take an active role in
setting their own career directions and finding the necessary resources to develop
in line with those directions.
Another advantage of this approach is that employees are not given the
impression, which is possible with other approaches, that they are guaranteed
advancement. Management should state the message, loud and clear, that ‘‘we
can’t guarantee promotions, but we can guarantee that those who have taken
the steps to obtain the necessary qualifications for a higher-level position will
be given due consideration.’’
However, the chief disadvantage of this approach is that the organization
sacrifices control over employees. Indeed, it may not always be apparent
whether replacements exist for each key position. It thus creates a talent pool
rather than a position-oriented succession plan. In practical terms, this means
that nobody may know at any time if even one person is ‘‘ready’’ to assume
important positions in the organization.
Empowered individual potential assessment is likely to remain important,
a mainstream approach. One reason is that it matches current thinking about
the need to decentralize decision making and give the control to those who
deal with customers or consumers daily. A second reason is that this approach
can unleash individual initiative rather than stifle it, thereby motivating people
to want to qualify for advancement.
The Growing Use of Assessment Centers and Portfolios
Since the previous editions of this book appeared in print, the world has
changed. Organizations are now using assessment centers and portfolios to
assess individual potential. But what are they?
Assessment Centers
Assessment centers are back as a tool for potential assessment in succession
management. 21 Of course, an assessment center is a process and should not
be confused with a place. The idea is simple enough: create a realistic simulation
of the work performed by those at targeted levels—for example, top man-

222 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
agement work—and then run individuals through the process to determine
how well they perform in a higher-level (or targeted) position.
Assessment centers went out of fashion for a time owing to the hard work
and expense involved in setting them up. After all, they must be based on the
actual work performed (rather than subjective impressions) or the competencies
linked to successful performance. The individual’s progress in the assessment
center is rated by trained assessors who must judge the performance of
the individuals. There is still concern in some circles about the time and cost
involved in establishing and maintaining assessment centers and concern
about the possibility of not being able to defend against discrimination complaints.
An alternative is to send individuals through outsourced assessment
centers, established by universities or by consulting companies. Unfortunately,
the latter approach means that individuals may be rated against some other
organization’s competency models, which could be a formula for misidentifying
the abilities of individuals.
Ten classic errors have been identified in the use of assessment centers,
and organizations that set out to use them should do their best to avoid these 22 :
1. Poor Planning
2. Inadequate Job Analysis
3. Weakly Defined Dimensions
4. Poor Exercises
5. No Pretest Evaluations
6. Unqualified Assessors
7. Inadequate Assessor Training
8. Inadequate Candidate Preparation
9. Sloppy Behavior Documentation and Scoring
10. Misuse of Results
Of course, the value of this approach is that it is thus possible to see individuals
in action before they are promoted. That is a significant advantage. Assessment
centers also do a good job of identifying actual behaviors—that is, observable
actions—that are far more valid and reliable than notoriously weak job interviews.
Work Portfolios
How does an employer assess an individual’s relative readiness for a higherlevel
job? One way is to focus on behaviors, which are essentially observable
demonstrations. Competencies can be manifested as behaviors. And, of course,
full-circle, multirater (that is, 360-degree) assessment is one way to measure

Assessing Future Work Requirements and Individual Potential
223
behaviors because raters are usually asked how often or how well they have
seen an individual demonstrate behaviors linked to competencies.
Of course, an alternative to measuring behaviors is to focus on the outputs
or outcomes of competencies. For instance, if examining the typing behavior
of a secretary, a rater can focus on what he or she does while typing. But
since that may be pointless, another way to measure the demonstration of
competencies is through work samples. A work sample is literally an example
of the work output. For a secretary, a work sample may be a typed letter or
report. The rater can judge the quality of what the secretary produces.
How does measuring outputs or outcomes relate to succession planning
and management? The answer to that question should be apparent. If, for
example, a supervisor being groomed for the job of manager would be expected
to produce budgets as part of the manager’s job, then he or she could
prepare a budget and present it as an example of his or her work. If the supervisor
does not do budgeting in his or her present job, then that can become
the focus of developmental activities on a competency like ‘‘budgeting skill.’’
Carrying out that skill may be essential to qualify for promotion to manager,
for instance.
A work portfolio, sometimes called a dossier, began in the art world. Artists
must convince gallery owners to show their work. Since gallery space and
time are limited, gallery owners want to know what quality of work the artist
produces. To address that concern, artists compile examples of their best
works—such as watercolors, charcoal drawings, oil paintings, or photos of
sculptures—to show the gallery owner. These are assembled in a portfolio that
the artist can carry with him or her. The gallery owner then judges the quality
of the work—presumably the best work that the artist has done—and decides
whether the artist’s talents warrant an art show.
The same idea can be applied to rating individuals’ abilities. They can be
asked to assemble a portfolio that represents their best work—or, alternatively,
represents the best work that they could prepare to show what they could do
in a job they do not yet hold. For instance, a management consultant who is
interviewing for an entry-level job might present examples of marketing materials
he or she has prepared, proposals written, deliverables produced, and
letters of testimony from satisfied clients. Similarly, a supervisor who is interviewing
to become a department manager could provide examples of work
outputs that are linked to essential requirements of the department manager’s
job.
To create a work portfolio, start with the competency model or with a job
description and ask: what are the outcomes, tangible or intangible, of that
competency or work activity? The portfolio can then be prepared with the
resume at the front, a targeted job description or competency model, and then
work samples representing the supervisor’s efforts to demonstrate the real
work performed by department managers. Work portfolios may then be compared
for quality and the person whose work portfolio is best may be invited
to participate in additional steps of the selection process.

224 A SSESSING THE P RESENT AND THE F UTURE
The value of work portfolios is that they go to work results. It is not a
matter of impressing interviewers alone, though participating in interviews
may still be essential to be selected. But work portfolios have the advantage of
focusing attention on desired results. Of course, a disadvantage is that raters
may not assess the same work in the same ways without training and/or agreedupon
guidelines for rating that work. Additionally, job applicants must understand
clearly what they are being asked to provide by way of work samples. If
they are not, then what can happen may not be good. For example, ‘‘when
Optum, Inc., a White Plains, N.Y., software company, asked applicants to submit
work samples, ‘we got in personal poetry and song lyrics,’ says Kelly Vizzini,
director of corporate marketing.’’ 23 One time when I asked for a writing
sample from a job applicant, he used a dolly to wheel in eleven large three-ring
binders full of material he had written. Unfortunately, when that happened, I
was away from my desk, and he left before I could return. When I did return,
I was amazed to see an enormous stack of material sitting on my desk, which
I had no room to store.
But the approach can also work well. Another time I conducted some supervisory
training for a large organization. The Operations Manager wanted
her thirty-five supervisors to take paper-and-pencil examinations. I dissuaded
her of that and, instead, convinced her to have each supervisor assemble a
notebook—a work portfolio—of his or her best work. That way, the Operations
Manager could see for herself what level of work they performed, and
that prompted much discussion as she reviewed what they regarded as good
work samples. She was then able to use those work samples as a focal point
for developing the supervisory group—and assess individuals for their potential
for future advancement.
Summary
As this chapter has shown, information about future work requirements and
individual potential is essential to an effective succession planning and management
program. When paired with information about present work requirements
and individual job performance, it becomes the basis for preparing
individual development plans to narrow the gaps between what individuals
already know and do and what they must know and do to qualify for advancement.

PART
IV
CLOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL GAP’’:
OPERATING AND EVALUATING A SUCCESSION
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT PROGRAM
Part I
Background Information About
Succession Planning and Management
Part IV
Closing the “Developmental Gap”:
Operating and Evaluating a Succession
Planning and Management Program
Part II
Laying the Foundation for a
Succession Planning and
Management Program
Part III
Assessing the Present and the Future
•Testing bench strength
•Formulating internal promotion policy
•Preparing individual development plans (IDPs)
•Developing successors internally
•Assessing alternatives to SP&M, as necessary
•Applying online and high-tech approaches to SP&M programs
•Evaluating SP&M programs
•Taking steps to address predictions about the possible future of
SP&M programs

This page intentionally left blank

C H A P T E R 1 0
DEVELOPING INTERNAL
SUCCESSORS
For a succession planning and management (SP&M) program to be effective,
the organization must have some means by which to replace key job incumbents
as vacancies occur in their positions. Promotion from within is a timehonored
and crucially important, albeit traditional, way to do that.
But, to prepare individuals for promotion, the organization has an obligation
to do more than merely identify present and future work requirements
and performance. Some way must also be found to clarify—and systematically
close—the developmental gap between what possible successors can already
do and what they must do to qualify for advancement. Individual development
planning is the process of clarifying that developmental gap; internal
development uses planned training, education, development, and other
means to close the gap and thereby meet succession needs.
This chapter focuses on determining the organization’s collective succession
needs, using promotion from within to meet those needs, clarifying individual
developmental gaps, and closing those gaps systematically through
planned training, education, and development. More specifically, then, this
chapter addresses the following questions:
▲ What is bench strength, and how can the leaders of an organization test
bench strength?
▲ Why is internal promotion so important for succession, and when is
it—and when is it not—appropriate for meeting SP&M needs?
▲ What is an individual development plan (IDP)? How should one be prepared,
followed up, and evaluated?
▲ What are some important methods of internal development, and when
should they be used?
Testing Bench Strength
Once key positions and work requirements have been identified, the organization
should test bench strength. That is important because it provides informa-
227

228 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
tion about the organization’s collective succession needs. That information
can, in turn, dramatize the importance of taking action to meet SP&M needs.
What Is Bench Strength?
Bench strength is the organization’s ability to fill vacancies from within. Testing
bench strength means determining how well the organization is able to fill
vacancies in key positions from within.
Turnover saps bench strength. There are two kinds of turnover. Unavoidable
turnover is outside the immediate control of the organization. It is the
loss of personnel through death, disability, and retirement. It may also include
turnover resulting from organizational action, such as layoff, early retirement,
buyout, or other means. Although many line managers would like to include
promotions and transfers from their areas in the definition of unavoidable
turnover, most HR departments do not include internal movements in the
definition of unavoidable turnover.
On the other hand, avoidable turnover is initiated by employees. It is a
loss resulting from resignation as individuals leave the organization, typically
moving to positions in other organizations. Although turnover of any kind is
costly because the organization must find and train replacements, avoidable
turnover is worse because it could be avoided if the organization could find
some way to retain the employees.
Avoidable turnover from key positions—or the less of high potentials—can
be particularly distressing because it creates unnecessary crises. (This is sometimes
called critical turnover. 1 ) One aim of any SP&M program should thus
be to find ways to reduce avoidable turnover among high potentials or key
position incumbents—or at least find the means to keep it stable.
Approaches to Testing Bench Strength
To test an organization for bench strength, ask decision-makers how they
would replace key positions in their areas of responsibility or ensure that work
requirements will be met through other, more innovative, means. Use any of
the means described below.
By Replacement Charting
Prepare an organization chart to show the range of possible replacements for
each key position in a work area. (See Exhibits 10-1 and 10-2.) Note how many
holes can be identified. A hole is a position in which no internal replacement
can be identified. The lower the percentage of holes relative to key positions,
the greater is the organization’s bench strength.

Developing Internal Successors
229
Exhibit 10-1. A Sample Replacement Chart Format: Typical Succession
Planning and Management Inventory for the Organization
Sample
Position
Potential Successor
Potential Successor
Potential Successor
1
2
3
1: Successor ready now to one year
2: Successor ready in one to two years
3: No successor identified in five-year
time frame
Area Director
Department
Vice President
Staff
Functional
Vice President
Functional
Vice President
Assistant
Vice President
Assistant
Vice President
Assistant
Vice President
Director
Assistant
Vice President
Source: Norman H. Carter, ‘‘Guaranteeing Management’s Future through Succession Planning,’’ Journal of Information Systems
Management (Summer 1986), 19. Used by permission of the Journal of Information Systems Management.
By Questioning
Ask senior executives who will replace key-position incumbents in their areas
in the event of a vacancy. Note how many holes by function can be identified.
Track the holes. The lower the percentage of holes to key positions, the greater
is the organization’s bench strength.
By Evidence
Using the results of an analysis of personnel records over the last few years,
find out which departures created the worst problems for the organization.
Note the number of such problems relative to total departures (turnover). The
higher the percentage, the weaker the bench strength.
By Combination
Use a combination of the methods identified above to assess bench strength.
Note the percentage of holes. Feed that information back to decision-makers
to dramatize the value and importance of the SP&M program.

230 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 10-2. Succession Planning and Management Inventory by Position
Key
Title
Performance
Name of Incumbent
Age Service
Time in
Position
Salary
Readiness
Potential
Performance Rating
Definition
X New—in position less than three months. Not evaluated.
1 Unsatisfactory results and performance.
2 Marginal—does not meet requirements of position (with learning
discounted). Attitude and/or initiative not acceptable.
Remedial action indicated.
3 Satisfactory—generally meets job requirements but room for improvement.
If in a major learning phase, considerable room for improvement.
4 Above average—surpasses overall job requirements but lacks strength in
some areas.
5 Superior—some elements of performance may rate as exceptional, but
overall performance falls below an exceptional rating.
6 Exceptional—general all-around excellence in quality/quantity of work,
initiative, self-development, new ideas, and attitude. Rapid learner.
Potential
A Outstanding—can advance two levels above present position.
B Considerable—can advance at least one level above present position
and/or assume substantial added responsibility at present level.
C Some—can assume added responsibilities at present level.
D Limited—at or near capacity in present position.
E Key capacity in current position—vital technical knowledge precludes
movement.
X New—in position less than three months. Not evaluated.
Readiness
R/O Qualified to move now.
R1 Within one to two years.
R2 Within two to four years.
N/A Current level appropriate.
Source: Norman H. Carter, ‘‘Guaranteeing Management’s Future through Succession Planning,’’ Journal of Information Systems
Management (Summer 1986), 20. Used by permission of the Journal of Information Systems Management.

Developing Internal Successors
231
Managing Talent Shows
Talent shows go by many names. Sometimes they are called monthly, quarterly,
or annual succession planning and management meetings that focus on identifying
available talent in the organization eligible for promotion, discussing
special developmental assignments that should be given to individuals from
various divisions, evaluating the size of the organization’s talent pool relative
to expected needs, or discussing how well senior managers have been grooming
talent in their divisions or departments. One outcome of a talent show—
sometimes called a development meeting or even (jokingly) a ‘‘beauty
pageant’’—is a verified list of high potentials and developmental assignments
for them. Another, more subtle outcome of a talent show is that it provides a
means by which to hold senior managers accountable for developing talent by
encouraging them to discuss, either in public with their peers or in private
with the CEO and the VP of HR, how well they are handling the development
of talent in their divisions or departments.
It is worth mentioning that talent shows are the typical culmination of an
annual succession process. There are three phases.
Phase I: Preparation
Senior managers must prepare for their meeting. A major value-added that can
be provided by the HR department is to hold meetings with each senior manager
before the meeting with the CEO or their peers to discuss what they will
say and how they will say it. The reason to do that is that managers have a
tendency to focus on ‘‘what is wrong.’’ That management-by-exception philosophy,
while possibly desirable in other areas of management by economizing
the time spent, can be devastating to the reputations of successors. The point
is that public meetings to discuss development with the CEO or with peers
should focus on ‘‘what we are going to do and what we want the outcomes to
be’’ rather than ‘‘what is wrong’’ with someone. HR professionals can work
through the problems that lead up to various developmental actions. In that
way, public meetings can focus on actions to be taken and the desired results—
and not on what is ‘‘wrong’’ with someone.
Phase II: The Meeting
The meeting itself must be planned. An agenda needs to be assembled. Someone
in HR is usually assigned that task. It may be the vice president of HR, or
it may be a key report of the VP of HR. But the agenda should ensure that time
is economically used.
One key issue to work out in advance is what the purpose of the meeting
is to be. Several purposes are possible. One type of meeting focuses on rating
possible successors and verifying a talent pool. That may require time for
open-air discussions. Another type of meeting focuses on discussing the prog-

232 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
ress made in developing talent by division. A third type of meeting focuses on
high potentials and what developmental assignments should be recommended
to leverage their talents, challenge them, and build their competencies
for the future.
It is particularly important to pay attention to the group process of any
talent show. One reason is that the relative willingness of people to speak their
minds honestly is quite important to making good decisions. It is not desirable
to have one or a few people dominating these meetings. At the end of each
meeting, a discussion should focus on such group process questions as ‘‘How
well did we work together?’’ and ‘‘How could we work together more effectively
in the future?’’
Phase III: The Follow-Up
One thing that is often forgotten—but that must not be forgotten—is followup
to ensure that actions are taken as they have been agreed upon. Often it
falls to HR professionals to follow up. That may require e-mails, phone calls,
personal visits, and other contacts to ensure that agreed-upon actions are
taken. One reason that is important is that lack of follow-through is a common
problem in succession. A second reason is that decisions are pointless if they
are not acted on. Someone must pay attention to that. It will not just take care
of itself. (See Exhibit 10-3 for more information about talent shows.)
Formulating Internal Promotion Policy
The centerpiece of a systematic SP&M program is a written policy favoring
internal promotion. Lacking such a policy, organizations may have difficulty
keeping ambitious high potentials and exemplary performers who seek advancement.
If they grow discouraged, they can contribute to a devastating
increase in avoidable, and critical, turnover. It is thus essential for the organization
to make all reasonable efforts to retain them. One way to do that is to
place the organization ‘‘on the record’’ as favoring promotion from within.
Not only does a promotion-from-within policy motivate employees by showing
that their efforts can pay off through promotion, but promotion from within
also saves the organization money in recruiting, selecting, and training newcomers.
2
Essential Components of an Internal Promotion Policy
To be effective, an internal promotion policy should do the following:
▲ Unequivocally state the organization’s commitment to promoting employees
from within whenever possible and whenever they are qualified
to meet the work requirements of new positions. (But it is best to cap
promotions at 80 percent to avoid too much inbreeding.)

Developing Internal Successors
233
Exhibit 10-3. Talent Shows: What Happens?
At Eli Lilly, the direct managers of high-potential individuals participate in intensive
assessment discussions with other executives concerning the individual’s strengths,
development needs, and career potential. The individual’s manager then provides
her with the key points of feedback from the assessment discussion. Afterward, the
individual works with the manager to develop a personal career plan that reflects
her perceived career potential and also factors in her career interests and goals.
The career plan is reviewed by the manager and individual and is updated when
needed or, at a minimum, on an annual basis.
The amount of time that executives in many companies are devoting to succession
planning is a clear reflection of the increased priority placed on developing top
talent. At Dow Chemical, the Human Resource Council—a small group that includes
the CEO and a handful of his key staff members—spends five days each year
off-site on succession planning: talking about candidates, reviewing development
plans, and directing development assignments. At Corning, executives in each
major unit spend one to four days per year in people reviews that extend down well
below the managerial level. The involvement of senior executives is often expressed
in very personal ways. In a number of companies, CEOs, such as former General
Electric’s Jack Welch, review job assignments and compensation recommendations
for several hundred managers.
Source: John Beeson, ‘‘Succession Planning,’’ Across the Board 37:2 (2000), 39. Used by permission.
▲ Define internal promotion.
▲ Explain the business reasons for that policy.
▲ Explain the legitimate conditions under which that policy can be waived
and an external candidate can be selected.
Since an internal promotion policy will (naturally) build employee expectations
that most promotions will be made from within, decision-makers should
anticipate challenges—legal and otherwise—to every promotion decision that
is made. For that reason, the policy should be reviewed by HR professionals,
operating managers, and legal professionals before it is implemented or
widely communicated. In any case, reviewing the policy before adoption is
more likely to build consistent understanding and ownership of it.
When Are Internal Promotions Appropriate or Inappropriate?
Internal promotion is appropriate to meet a vacancy in a key position when a
qualified replacement from the organization is:
▲ Ready to assume the duties of the key position by demonstrated mastery
of at least 80 percent of the position requirements and progress

234 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
toward meeting or exceeding the remaining 20 percent of the position
requirements.
▲ Willing to accept the position, expressing a desire to do the work.
▲ Able to accept the position by having his or her own replacement prepared
in a reasonably short time span and by being ready to assume the
duties of a key position.
But promotion from within is not appropriate for meeting SP&M needs
when any of these conditions cannot be met. Alternatives to internal promotions
are thus appropriate when a qualified internal candidate cannot be found
after a reasonable search, when possible candidates refuse to accept a position,
or when possible candidates cannot be freed up from their present duties
in a reasonable time.
The Importance of Job Posting
Job posting is an internal method of notifying and recruiting employees for
new positions in the organization. To begin such a program, the organization
should establish a policy that position opening notices will be posted in prominent
locations, such as next to building entrances and exits, near cafeteria
entrances, on bulletin boards, near restrooms, or online. A typical job posting
notice contains information about the position that is open, such as its title,
pay grade, organizational location, and desirable starting date. Employees
from all areas of the organization are encouraged to apply, and selection decisions
are typically made on the basis of the applicant who brings the best
qualifications to the job. (In some organizations, however, seniority may be an
overriding factor in making a selection decision. Additionally, posting may be
restricted to include only some, but not all, job categories or functions in the
organization.)
In many cases, positions are posted internally while also advertised externally.
In that way, both internal and external applicants are attracted. The organization
can thus seek the most qualified applicant, whether or not that person
is presently employed by the organization.
The major benefit of job posting is that it gives individuals a say in their
career directions. Further, it permits the organization to consider applicants
from outside the immediate work area, from which successors for key positions
may frequently be selected. 3 It also reduces the chance of employee
hoarding, in which an employee’s manager blocks promotions or transfers of
high-potential or exemplary performers so they will remain forever trapped,
though very productive, in the manager’s work area. 4
The major drawback to job posting has more to do with the management
of such programs than with the posting concept itself. If employees are allowed
to jump to new jobs merely to realize small wage increases, posting

Developing Internal Successors
235
can be costly and demoralizing, especially to those responsible for training
‘‘mercenary job hoppers.’’ Hence, to be used effectively as a tool in SP&M, job
posting should be done for all jobs. However, careful restrictions should be
placed on the process to ensure that employees remain in their positions for
a period sufficient to recoup training costs.
Preparing Individual Development Plans
Testing bench strength should clarify the organization’s collective SP&M
needs. However, it does not indicate what individuals should do to qualify
for advancement to key positions. That is the reason for preparing individual
development plans.
What Is an Individual Development Plan?
An individual development plan (IDP) results from a comparison of individual
strengths and weaknesses on the current job and individual potential for
advancement to possible key positions in the future. Preparing an IDP is a
process of planning activities that will narrow the gap between what individuals
can already do and what they should do to meet future work or competency
requirements in one or more key positions.
An IDP is a hybrid of a learning contract, a performance contract, and a
career-planning form. A learning contract is an agreement to learn. Contract
learning has enjoyed a long and venerable history. 5 It is particularly well suited
to participative, learning organizations that seek to balance individual career
needs and interests with organizational strategy and work requirements. A
performance contract is an agreement to achieve an identifiable, measurable
level of performance. 6 Sometimes tied to performance appraisal, it is directed
toward future performance improvement rather than past performance. Finally,
a career-planning form is a tool for helping individuals identify their
career goals and establish effective strategies for realizing them in the future.
A career-planning form is typically linked to an organizational career planning
program, which can reinforce and support SP&M.
An IDP goes a step beyond performance appraisal for the individual’s present
job and potential assessment of the individual’s capability for future advancement
to other, often key, positions in the organization. It results in a
detailed plan to furnish individuals with the necessary development they need
to qualify for advancement into their next positions.
Developing an IDP usually requires a systematic comparison of the individual’s
present abilities (as indicated by competency requirements, work activities
appearing on job descriptions, and current performance as measured by
performance appraisals) and future capabilities (as revealed through individual
potential assessment). The IDP should narrow the gap between them, pro-

236 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
viding a clear-cut plan by which to prepare the individual for future
advancement.
How Are Individual Development Plans Prepared?
Preparing an IDP shares strong similarities to preparing a learning contract.
Take ten key steps when preparing individual development plans. (Exhibit 10-
4 depicts these steps in a simple model.)
Step 1: Select Possible Key Positions for Which to Prepare the Individual
Begin by targeting a family of key positions in the organization for the individual.
In most cases, this should be done only after a significant dialog has taken
place between the individual and an organizational representative. As Deegan
notes, ‘‘it is important that the individual understand the illustrative nature of
the position you select as the targeted one and focus not on that specific job
but on the family of jobs represented by it. Otherwise there may be disappointment
if that job is not offered even though a future offer might actually meet
the person’s needs better as well as those of the firm.’’ 7 Of course, if it is
anticipated that the individual will be prepared for a specific key position that
will soon become vacant, then planning should be focused on that position
after discussion with the individual.
Step 2: Consider the Likely Time During Which the Individual Must Be Prepared
Time affects what kind of—and how many—developmental activities can be
carried out. When individuals are slated for rapid advancement, there is little
or no time for preparation. Hence, those developmental activities that are selected
should be absolutely critical to effective job performance. There is thus
a need to prioritize developmental activities. That should be done, of course,
even when time is ample. The key issue in this step, then, amounts to this:
How much time is available for development?
Step 3: Diagnose Learning Needs
Exactly what is the difference between the individual’s present knowledge and
skills and the work requirements of the key position for which the individual
is to be prepared? The answer to that question clarifies the developmental gap.
One way to determine this difference is to compare the individual’s present
work requirements and performance to those required in a targeted key
position. (You might think of that as akin to conducting a performance appraisal
on a position to which the individual aspires or for which he or she is
being groomed.) As a simple example, it may involve comparing how well an
employee could perform his or her immediate supervisor’s job.
Another way to determine this difference is to ask the key position incum-

Developing Internal Successors
237
Exhibit 10-4. A Simplified Model of Steps in Preparing Individual
Development Plans (IDPs)
Step One:
Selecting Possible Key Positions for
Which to Prepare the Individual or Competencies
Needing Development
Step Two:
Considering the Likely Time during Which
the Individual Must Be Prepared
Step Three:
Diagnosing Learning Needs/Competency-Building Needs
Step Four:
Specifying Learning Objectives
Based on the Results of Step Three
Step Five:
Specifying Learning Resources and Strategies
Needed to Achieve Learning Objectives
Step Six:
Specifying Evidence of Accomplishment
Step Seven:
Specifying How the Evidence
Will Be Validated
Step Eight:
Reviewing the Contract
with Consultants
Step Nine:
Carrying Out the Contract
Step Ten:
Evaluating Learning and Outcomes

238 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
bent to review the individual’s present work requirements and performance
against the requirements of the incumbent’s position and to recommend
planned developmental activities to narrow the gap between what the employee
already knows and can do and what he or she should know or do to
perform in the place of the key position incumbent.
When diagnosing learning needs, be aware that the quality of the results
depends on the quality of the diagnosis. Shortcuts are not conducive to useful
outcomes. While busy executives might prefer to short-circuit this process, that
will usually prove to be counterproductive.
Step 4: Specify Learning Objectives Based on the Results of Step 3
Learning objectives are the outcomes or results that are sought from planned
developmental activities. Needs represent deficiencies or problems to be
solved; objectives, on the other hand, represent desired solutions. Each need
should be linked to one—or more—learning objectives to ensure that each
‘‘problem’’ will be solved.
Learning objectives should always be stated in measurable terms. As Robert
F. Mager has noted, learning objectives should usually have three components
8 :
▲ Resources. What equipment, tools, information, or other resources
must be provided for the learner to demonstrate the necessary knowledge,
skills, or abilities?
▲ Criteria. How will achievement of learning objectives be measured?
What minimum performance standards must be achieved for the individual
to demonstrate competence?
▲ Conditions. Under what conditions must the learner perform?
Use the worksheet appearing in Exhibit 10-5 to prepare learning objectives
based on individual developmental needs.
Step 5: Specify Learning Resources and Strategies Needed to Achieve the Learning
Objectives
Learning strategies are the means by which learning objectives are to be
achieved. There are many strategies by which to achieve learning objectives.
Appropriate learning strategies depend on the learning objectives that are to
be met. They answer this question: What planned learning activities will help
narrow the gap between what individuals already know and what they must
know to meet key position requirements in the future?
Learning resources are what must be provided to achieve the learning objectives.
Resources might include people, money, time, expertise, equipment,
or information. People resources could include trainers, coaches, mentors, or
sponsors. Money resources could include funding for participation in on-thejob
or off-the-job developmental experiences. Time resources could include

Developing Internal Successors
239
Exhibit 10-5. A Worksheet for Preparing Learning Objectives Based on
Individual Development Needs
Directions: Use this worksheet to help you prepare specific, measurable learning
objectives to guide the process of meeting individual development needs.
In the left column below, indicate activities, responsibilities, duties, tasks, or essential
job functions to which the individual needs exposure in order to qualify for advancement.
Then, in the right column below, draft specific and measurable learning objectives
to describe what individuals should be able to know, do, or feel upon
completion of a planned development/learning experience tied to those activities,
responsibilities, duties, tasks, or essential job functions. When you finish drafting the
objectives, double-check them to ensure that you have listed (1) resources, such as
information, equipment, or tools that are necessary for demonstrating the objective;
(2) measurable criteria by which to assess how well the learning objective was
achieved.
Indicate Activities, Responsibilities, Duties,
Tasks, or Essential Job Functions to Which
the Individual Needs Exposure in Order to
Qualify for Advancement
Specific and Measurable Learning
Objectives

240 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
released time from work to participate in planned training, education, or
developmental activities. Expertise could include access to knowledgeable
people or information sources. Equipment could include access, for developmental
purposes, to specialized machines or tools. (Use the worksheet in Exhibit
10-6 to identify the resources necessary to develop individuals for key
positions for which they have been targeted.)
Step 6: Specify Evidence of Accomplishment
How can the organization track accomplishment of learning objectives? Answer
that question by providing clear, measurable learning objectives and regular
feedback about the learner’s progress to the learner and those interested
in the learner’s development. If possible, use short, informal project appraisals
or more formalized, written developmental appraisals to document individual
progress, provide evidence of accomplishment, and give the individual specific
feedback that can lead to future performance improvement.
Step 7: Specify How the Evidence Will Be Validated
Be clear about the means by which achievement of learning objectives will be
validated. Will a knowledgeable expert, such as a key position incumbent, review
the results? Will the learner be asked to complete an oral interview to
demonstrate results? Will learners’ performance on developmental projects be
reviewed by those with whom they work? These questions must be answered
separately for each learning objective and for each learning project or assignment
on which the learners are to work to qualify for advancement.
Step 8: Review the Contract with Consultants
Before the individual development plan is approved, it should be reviewed by
knowledgeable experts. In this context, experts and consultants are meant to
have broad meanings. For instance, experts and consultants might include
any—or all—of the following:
▲ Members of SP&M Committees
▲ Friends
▲ Spouses
▲ Immediate Organizational Superiors
▲ The Learners’ Peers
▲ The Learners’ Subordinates
▲ Academic Experts
▲ Recognized Authorities in Other Organizations
Depending on the organization, the individual, and the key position for which
the individual is being prepared, other experts or consultants might prove

Developing Internal Successors
241
Exhibit 10-6. A Worksheet for Identifying the Resources Necessary to
Support Developmental Experiences
Directions: Use this worksheet to help you identify the resources necessary to support
planned learning/developmental experiences.
In the left column below, indicate learning objectives and the planned learning/
developmental experiences that will be used in helping an individual qualify for
promotion. Then, in the right column below, indicate specifically what resources—
such as information, money, trainers, equipment, time, and so forth—will be needed
to allow the individual to meet each learning objective and participate in each
planned learning/developmental experience.
Learning Objectives and Planned
Learning/Developmental Experiences
Intended to Help an Individual Qualify
for Advancement
What Specific Resources Will Be
Needed to Achieve Each Objective and
Participate in Each Planned Learning/
Developmental Experiences?

242 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
useful. For instance, individuals may wish to identify their own mentors and
ask for their advice while negotiating an IDP. In unionized settings, union
members may also wish to include union representatives.
Ask the experts to provide information on which they are qualified to
comment. For instance, from their perspective, does an IDP appear to have
identified the right learning needs, established the right learning objectives,
identified the most appropriate learning strategies and resources, and established
the best means by which to evaluate results? Is it practical and capable
of being completed in the time allowed? What suggested changes, if any, do
the ‘‘experts’’ recommend—and why?
Step 9: Carry Out the Contract
I have found that the implementation of IDPs is the Achilles’ heel of many
otherwise exemplary SP&M programs. While well conceived, many IDPs are
not well executed. Hence, some means must be established to ensure accountability—and
monitor results during the IDP’s time span. That can be done by
planning quarterly IDP review meetings with representatives from each major
area of the organization so they can report on the progress made in their areas.
Alternatively, an SP&M coordinator can pay visits to individual managers to
review the progress made on IDPs in their areas of responsibility. The effect of
these actions is to draw attention to the plans—and to maintain an impetus
for action.
Step 10: Evaluate Learning and Outcomes
Be sure that results (learning outcomes) are measured against intentions
(learning objectives and needs). There are several ways to do that. One way is
to establish periodic developmental assessments, much like project-oriented
performance appraisals. If this approach is used, develop a simple feedback
form to provide documentation of learners’ progress on each developmental
experience. They can then be reviewed upon completion of learning objectives
or at agreed-upon intervals during the developmental experiences.
A second way is to provide a checklist on the IDP form to indicate whether
learning objectives have been achieved. That is a simpler, albeit less ambitious
and rigorous, approach than periodic developmental assessments. However,
it does have the advantage of being a time-efficient approach that makes it
more likely to be used by busy decision-makers. A sample individual development
plan (IDP) is shown in Exhibit 10-7.
Developing Successors Internally
Internal development is a general term that refers to those developmental
activities sponsored by the organization that are intended to help an individual

Developing Internal Successors
243
Exhibit 10-7. A Sample Individual Development Plan
Directions: Use this individual development plan to help an individual qualify for
advancement. The individual’s immediate organizational superior should complete
the form and then discuss it with the individual. If the individual feels that modifications
to it should be made, then the reasons for that should be discussed.
Employee’s Name
Department
Appraiser’s Name
Department
Job Title
Time in Position
Job Title
Time in Position
Today’s Date Plan Covering to
mo./day/yr. mo./day/yr. mo./day/yr.
1. For what key position(s) should this individual be prepared? Alternatively, what
kind of competencies should be developed? Over what time span?
2. What are the individual’s career plans/objectives?
3. What learning objectives should guide the individual’s development? (Note to
appraiser: Be sure to systematically compare the individual’s current job description
to a current job description for the targeted position[s] and list the identifiable
gap below. Alternatively, compare the individual’s present competencies to those
needed in a future position/level.)
(continues)

Developing Internal Successors
244
Exhibit 10-7. (continued)
4. By what methods/strategies may the objectives be met? (Indicate a specific learning
plan below, indicating learning objectives, strategies by which to achieve the
objectives, deadlines for achieving each result, and a checklist indicating whether
the learning objective was achieved.) Add paper if necessary.
Verified?
Learning Deadlines/ Yes No
Objectives Strategies Benchmark Dates ( ) ( )
5. How can the relative success of each learning objective be measured?
Learning
Objectives
Evaluation Approach
qualify for advancement by closing the gap between present work requirements/performance
and future work requirements/potential. Indeed, it is the
means by which individual potential is realized as the future unfolds in the
present.
There are several approaches to internal development. Many ways have
been devised to develop individuals in their present positions, 9 and as many
as 300 ways have been devised to develop individuals. 10 My 2004 survey identified
common approaches to internal development. The survey results are
summarized in Exhibit 10-8, and each strategy is briefly summarized in Exhibit
10-9.
Other strategies may also be used. These include:
1. Who-Based Strategies. These learning strategies focus on pairing up
high potentials with individuals who have special talents—or management
styles—worthy of emulation. For example, matching up a high potential with
a participative manager or those possessing special abilities in startups, turnarounds,
or shutdown efforts.
2. What-Based Strategies. These learning strategies focus on giving high
potentials exposure to specific types of experiences, such as projects, task
forces, committees, jobs, or assignments that require analytical skills, leadership
skills, or skills in starting up an operation, shutting down an operation,
converting a manual to an automated process, or another project of a specific
kind. Additionally, service on interteam, interdepartmental, or interdivisional
(text continues on page 250)

Exhibit 10-8. Methods of Grooming Individuals for Advancement
There are many ways by which to implement succession plans, since individuals may be groomed in different ways. Review the
list of possible methods by which to groom individuals in column 1 below. Then, in column 2 , check () yes or no to indicate
whether your organization is using it and, in column 3, circle the code indicating how effective you feel that method is in
developing people to assume future responsibilities. In column 3, use the following scale: 1 Not at All Effective; 2 Not
Very Effective; 3 Somewhat Effective; 4 Effective; 5 Very Effective.
A
B
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
Possible Methods by Which
to Groom Individuals
Off-the-Job Degree Programs
Sponsored by Colleges/ Universities
On-Site Degree Programs Sponsored
by Colleges/Universities
Is Your Organization Using This
Method to Develop People?
Yes
No
How Effective Do You Feel
This Method Is for
Developing People to
Assume Future Job
Responsibilities?
Not at
All Effective
1 2 3 4 5
(Mean Response)
56% 44% 3.8
11% 89% 2.78
Very
Effective
(continues)

Exhibit 10-8. (continued)
C
D
E
F
Off-the-Job Public Seminars Sponsored
by Vendors
Off-the-Job Public Seminars Sponsored
by Universities
In-House Classroom Courses Tailor-
Made for Management-Level Employees
In-House Classroom Courses Purchased
from Outside Sources and
Modified for In-House Use
56% 44% 3.11
100% 0% 3.44
89% 11% 3.67
56% 44% 3.22
G Unplanned On-the-Job Training 78% 22% 3.33
H Planned On-the-Job Training 100% 0% 4.11
I Unplanned Mentoring Programs 44% 56% 3.33
J Planned Mentoring Programs 89% 11% 4.33
K Unplanned Job Rotation Programs 11% 89% 3.11
L Planned Job Rotation Programs 56% 44% 4.22
Source: William J. Rothwell, Results of a 2004 Survey on Succession Planning and Management Practices. Unpublished survey results (University Park, Penn.: The Pennsylvania State University, 2004).

Developing Internal Successors
247
Exhibit 10-9. Key Strategies for Internal Development
Appropriate and
Strategy How to Use It Inappropriate Uses
1. Off-the-Job Clarify job-related Appropriate:
Degree courses tied to work —For meeting specialized
Programs requirements of key individual needs that are
Sponsored positions. not widely enough shared
by Col- Compare individual to warrant on-site training
leges/Uni- skills to work require- Inappropriate:
versities ments. —For meeting highly spe-
Identify courses re- cialized needs unique to
lated to individual
one employer
needs.
Tie job requirements
to degree/course requirements,
if possible.
2. On-Site Same basic procedure Appropriate:
Degree as listed in #1 above. —When funding and time
Programs
are available
Sponsored
—When several people
by Col-
share similar needs
leges/Uni-
—When in-house expertise
versities
is not available
Inappropriate:
—When conditions listed
above cannot be met
—For meeting highly specialized
needs
3. Off-the-Job Compare work re- Appropriate:
Public Sem- quirements to the in- —When needs are limited
inars Spon- structional objectives to a few people
sored by indicated by informa- —When in-house expertise
Vendors tion about the off-the- does not match the venjob
seminar.
dor’s
Inappropriate:
—For meeting needs unique
to one employer
(continues)

248 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 10-9. (continued)
Appropriate and
Strategy How to Use It Inappropriate Uses
4. Off-the-Job Same as #3 above. Appropriate:
Public Sem-
—Same as #3 above
inars Spon- Inappropriate:
sored by
—Same as #3 above
Universities
5. In-House Define specific instruc- Appropriate:
Classroom tional objectives that —When adequate re-
Courses are directly related to sources exist
Tailor- work requirements in —When in-house expertise
Made for key positions. is unavailable
Employees Use the courses to —When needs can be met
achieve instructional in time
objectives for many in- Inappropriate:
dividuals.
—For meeting requirements
unique to one organization
—For meeting objectives requiring
lengthy and experiential
learning
6. In-House Identify a learning Appropriate:
Classroom need shared by more —When several people
Courses than one person. share a common learning
Purchased Find published train- need
from Out- ing material from —When expertise exists to
side Sources commercial publishers modify materials develand
Modi- and modify for in- oped outside the organified
for In- house use. zation
House Use Deliver to groups. —When appropriate training
materials can be located
7. Unplanned Match up a high- Appropriate:
On-the-Job potential employee —When time, money, and
Training with an exemplary staffing are not of primary
performer in a key po- importance
sition. Inappropriate:
Permit long-term ob- —For efficiently and effecservation
of the exem- tively preparing highplar
by the highpotential.
potentials to be succes-
sors for key job incumbents

Developing Internal Successors
249
8. Planned Develop a detailed Appropriate:
On-the-Job training plan allowing —When key job incumbent
Training a ‘‘tell, show, do, fol- is an exemplar
low-up approach’’ to —When time and safety
instruction.
considerations permit
one-on-one instruction
Inappropriate:
—When the conditions
listed above cannot be
met
9. Unplanned Make people aware of Appropriate:
Mentoring what mentoring is. —For establishing the basis
Programs Help individuals un- for mentoring without obderstand
how they can ligating the organization
establish mentoring
to oversee it
relationships and real- —For encouraging individize
the chief benefits
ual autonomy
from them. Inappropriate:
Encourage key job in- —For encouraging diversity
cumbents and exem- and building relationships
plars to serve as
mentors.
across ‘‘unlike’’ individual
—For transferring specific
skills
10. Planned Match up individuals Appropriate:
Mentoring who may establish —For building top-level
Programs useful mentor-protégé ownership and familiarity
relationships.
with high-potentials
Provide training to —For pairing up ‘‘unlike inmentors
on effective
dividuals’’ on occasion
mentoring skills and to Inappropriate:
protégés on the best —For building specific skills
ways to take advantage
of mentoring relationships.
(continues)

250 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 10-9. (continued)
Appropriate and
Strategy How to Use It Inappropriate Uses
11. Unplanned Arrange to move indi- Appropriate:
Job Rotation viduals into positions —When sufficient staffing
Programs that will give them exists
knowledge, skills, or —When individual moveabilities
they will need ment will not create a sigin
the future, prefera- nificant productivity loss
bly (but not necessar- to the organization
ily) geared to Inappropriate:
advancement.
—When the conditions
Track individual prog- listed above cannot be
ress.
met
12. Planned Job Develop a specific Appropriate:
Rotation Learning Contract (or —When there is sufficient
Programs IDP) that clarifies the time and staffing to permit
learning objectives to the rotation to be effective
be achieved by the ro- Inappropriate:
tation.
—When time and staffing
Ensure that the work will not permit planned
activities in which the learning
individual gains experience
are directly related
to future work
requirements.
Monitor work progress
through periodic feedback
to the individual
and through performance
appraisal geared
to the rotation and related
to future potential.
committees can give the individual visibility and exposure to new people and
new functions.
3. When-Based Strategies. These learning strategies focus on giving high
potentials exposure to time pressure. For example, meeting a nearly impossible
deadline or beating a wily competitor to market.
4. Where-Based Strategies. These learning strategies focus on giving high
potentials exposure to special locations or cultures. For example, sending high

Developing Internal Successors
251
potentials on international job rotations or assignments to give them exposure
to the business in another culture or else send them to another domestic site
for a special project. Like any job rotation or temporary assignment, international
assignments should be preceded by a well-prepared plan that clarifies
what the individual is to do and learn—and why that is worth doing or learning.
This approach will shape expectations and thereby exert a powerful influence
on what people learn as well as on how they perform.
5. Why-Based Strategies. These learning strategies focus on giving high
potentials exposure to mission-driven change efforts that are, in turn, learning
experiences. For example, asking high potentials to pioneer startup efforts or
to visit competitors or ‘‘best-in-class’’ organizations to find out ‘‘why they do
what they do.’’
6. How-Based Strategies. These learning strategies focus on furnishing
high potentials with in-depth, ‘‘how-to’’ knowledge of different aspects of the
business in which they are otherwise weak. Examples might include lengthy
job assignments, task force assignments, or job rotations that expose a high
potential to another area of the business with which he or she is unfamiliar.
The Role of Leadership Development Programs
Leadership development programs are quite important to succession planning.
Indeed, in some cases, a leadership development program is the banner
under which potential successors are developed in a systematic, and even visible,
way. Leadership programs may also develop groups of people so as to
create talent pools.
Much has been written about leadership development 11 and leadership
development programs. 12 Their value is that they can provide groups of people
with structure—that is, an organizational scheme—by which to build competencies
systematically. There are two basic philosophies that can drive leadership
programs. (And they may be summarized with the age-old question: Are
leaders born, or are they made?) One philosophy is to make it easy for anyone
to get into the program but tough to stay in, or to ‘‘graduate.’’ That philosophy
goes well with a talent pool approach to SP&M. A second philosophy is to
make it very difficult to qualify for the program but easy to stay in. That philosophy
goes well with an approach that integrates employee selection with development.
Some decision-makers prefer to use a leadership development program as
a means to fire-test prospective successors. They are tested at every turn while
in the program. That tough-love philosophy suggests that qualifying for promotion
means ‘‘earning one’s stripes.’’ Those who prefer not to do that do
not have to. (But they will not be promoted, either.) Those who do have the
tenacity to stick with it end up by earning credibility with followers.

252 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
The Role of Coaching
Coaching is a means to the end of building talent. While much has been written
about it, 13 and it is true that coaching can be applied for many purposes to
correct deficiencies in performance or to build skills, it is important to SP&M
because it can be an important tool in grooming prospective successors for
the future. Generally speaking, training is planned and focused, while coaching
tends to be more spur-of-the-moment and driven by moment-by-moment
efforts to help others perform. 14 In an age where speed equals advantage, realtime
grooming has appeal to many managers as a means of competency-building
at the speed of change.
James Hunt and Joseph Weintraub provide specific advice about how managers
should coach. They should do the following: 15
▲ Make the effort to identify their best people. Coaching is not just a ‘‘fixit
strategy’’ for poor performers; rather, it is also to be used to prepare
promising people for the future.
▲ Encourage their people to seek out coaching, whether planned or spontaneous.
▲ Watch how they react to what their people do. In other words, good
managers avoid strong emotions and criticism of their best people.
▲ Make time to provide coaching and let people know that.
▲ Ask questions and avoid dogmatic statements about what people should
do. By asking questions, managers force employees to think things
through. That has a development purpose. In time, employees will
begin to think like the manager. But dogmatic orders will discourage
questions and will not prompt people to think for themselves or even
model how their immediate supervisor thinks.
▲ Listen carefully to what people say—and how they say it. Listening also
demonstrates that the manager actually cares about their people, and
the importance of emotional bonding should not be minimized.
▲ Model the behaviors of those who need coaching. Let employees see
the manager ask for help and use it.
▲ Provide useful feedback. Make sure it is timely and specific. If people
do not ask for feedback on what they did, give it to them anyway if it
will help their development for the future.
▲ Be sure to recognize positive performance and comment on it as well
as the not-so-good work that people do.
Various organizations now offer certification in coaching, 16 and information
about the competencies of effective coaches may be found through a simple
Web search. 17

Developing Internal Successors
253
The Role of Executive Coaching
Executive coaching has grown in popularity. 18 Some people have even hung
out their shingles as full-time executive coaches. Professional societies have
been formed of executive coaches 19 ; people can be certified as executive
coaches 20 ; and in some quarters executive coaches rank right up there with
personal trainers as an executive perk. Executive coaching competencies have
been identified, and they are distinct from more general coaching competencies.
21
But the importance of executive coaching in succession cannot be understated.
One strategy is to go ahead and promote people who are clearly not ready
for more demanding managerial (or technical) responsibility and then give
those people executive coaches as a way to offer them real-time, on-the-job
training. While that is not a strategy that the author of this book advocates, it
is one that is being used in organizations where the leaders fell asleep on
succession matters until it was too late.
There are two kinds of executive coaches. They should be clearly distinguished.
A job content coach provides guidance to individuals who are not up to
snuff on the job content. An example would be to assign the organization’s
retired CEO to the current CEO as a coach. The former CEO clearly understands
what the job entails and can provide guidance accordingly.
A process coach is different. Akin to a process consultant, a process executive
coach focuses on the image that the executive projects, the impact that he
or she has on a group, and how he or she works with a group to achieve
results. No knowledge of the job content is needed. But what is needed is
awareness of the specialized competencies associated with process consultation,
an organization development intervention invented by Edgar Schein. 22
The executive coaching process should be clearly focused and implemented.
It begins with establishing a contract between the coach and the
coachee that sets forth the goals of the effort and describes the schedule. Nondisclosure
agreements are typical, especially when the coach is made privy to
sensitive, even proprietary, information during the course of the consulting
engagement. The work plan for the consulting effort is clearly stated. Not all
work has to be carried out face-to-face, and it is possible to arrange phone
conversations, Web conversations, instant chats, and other real-time, virtually
enabled approaches to the executive coaching process. Executive coaches may
also administer psychological assessments to the executive, ranging from those
that are available off-the-shelf to those that require a license or degree to administer.
The Role of Mentoring
A mentor is simply a teacher. Mentoring is thus the process of teaching others.
In common language, a mentor is a helper who assists people in learning. The

254 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
person receiving help is called a mentee or a protégé. Mentors should not be
confused with sponsors. A sponsor is someone who actually opens doors and
provides access to visibility, people, and assignments or experiences; a mentor
is someone who provides advice. Of course, it is possible that mentors can
become sponsors or that sponsors can engage in mentoring.
Mentoring has fired the imagination of managers and others, and much
has been written about it in recent years. 23 One reason is that mentors can help
build bench strength and talent in organizations by providing support to others
to build their competencies in line with company needs. Mentoring, like
coaching and executive coaching, can thus provide a means to the end of
building bench strength. But mentoring implies something different from
coaching. While a coach provides support and direction just as a mentor does,
a mentor is interested in helping someone succeed. By definition, mentors are
usually not the immediate organizational supervisors of those they mentor,
since a reporting relationship may interfere with the objectivity essential to a
true helping relationship. (In short, a mentor cannot stand to gain or lose by
his or her mentee, but a coach can. In fact, just as athletic coaches are selfinterested
in how well their players perform, so are immediate supervisors.)
Mentoring programs may be established by organizations. They may be
formal (planned) or informal (unplanned). A typical approach to a formal program
is that the organization’s HR department will play matchmaker, pairing
up a promising person who wants a mentor to someone who is at least one
or more levels above that person on the organization chart but outside the
immediate chain of command. The HR department may even pay for breakfast,
lunch, or dinner for the two people to meet and determine if their relationship
might have promise. If so, then they continue it on their own without further
HR department involvement. Also, typically, a formal mentoring program may
involve training for aspiring mentors and/or mentees, since people do not just
naturally know how to play these parts. (The CD-ROM included with this book
provides a short program on mentoring.)
In an informal mentoring program—which is an oxymoron, since something
unplanned cannot really be a ‘‘program’’—individuals are merely encouraged
to seek out and approach others who may be helpful to them and to
their development. Successful people have almost always had mentors. Consequently,
mentoring requires mentees to take initiative to seek out those who
might help them and then ask for help. That help could be situation-specific,
such as ‘‘How do I deal with this situation?’’ or comprehensive, such as ‘‘How
do I systematically prepare myself for the future and then follow through on
my plan for individual development?’’
Mentors are helpful because they may be in the job that the mentees aspire
to, and hence they are well positioned to offer advice. After all, one key assumption
of succession planning and management is that individuals cannot
direct their own development for the simple reason that they have no experience
base to draw on. And it is in exactly this respect that a mentor can help.

Developing Internal Successors
255
How can mentoring play a role in succession planning and management?
The relationship should be obvious. In closing developmental gaps between
the competencies that individuals possess now and what they need to possess
to qualify for advancement, they must seek out people, work assignments, and
other experiences that will prepare them for the future and will equip them
with the competencies they need. Mentors can provide advice about what people
to seek, what work assignments to seek, and (perhaps most important
though sometimes overlooked) mentors can provide advice on handling company
politics that may help or hinder progress. To gain the most from a mentoring
effort, start with a plan. That plan can be prepared by the mentee to
‘‘ask for help,’’ but should be very clear about what help is needed.
A unique problem to consider in mentoring is the so-called developmental
dilemma. The development dilemma takes its name from a special problem
that may come up in the mentoring process. In the years following the Clarence
Thomas and Anita Hill scandal that rocked the nation, cross-gender mentoring
has been complicated by concerns over appearances. The point is that
older male executives who mentor younger female executives, or older female
executives who mentor younger male executives, may be misperceived in
those relationships. Typically a mentoring relationship requires interactions
such as meetings behind closed doors, breakfast, lunch or dinner meetings, or
other meetings in otherwise less than formal settings. Since tongue wagging is
a popular pastime, it is common for others to talk about what they think they
see. The situation is so bad in some quarters that older executives will have
mentoring meetings only if they can bring a third person along as chaperone
or else meet in open air areas where everything can be seen.
How can this problem be handled? Some ways that the organization can
help is to:
1. Provide advice about how to deal with the problems of perceptions and
how to manage them.
2. Take steps to clarify for others who may see two people meeting to
clarify, casually but in advance, what the meeting is about and why it is
being conducted to give those who wag their tongues less to talk about.
3. Ignore the problem all together and only deal with rumors as they
spring up.
4. Provide training to mentors and mentees, covering cross-gender issues
as part of the discussion.
The Role of Action Learning
Action learning is yet another way—like coaching, executive coaching, mentoring,
and leadership development programs—to build competencies. Action
learning, while invented in 1971 by Reg Revans, 24 literally means learning

256 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
through action. While various approaches to it exist, 25 they share a bias to
action. This is not online or onsite training; rather, it is practical learning that
builds competencies and is focused around solving problems, creating visions,
seeking goals, or leveraging strengths. 26
Typically, participants in action learning are assembled to work on a practical,
real-world problem. 27 They may be chosen based on their individual abilities
that will contribute to the issue that brings the team together and a
developmental need to be met. They are asked to collect information about an
issue, experiment with solutions or implement them, and learn while they do
that.
To use action learning appropriately, organizational leaders must select the
right people to put on the right teams. By doing that, individuals learn while
doing. And the organization gains a solution to a problem, a clearly conceptualized
vision, or a quantum leap in leveraging a strength.
Summary
Promotion from within is an important way to implement succession plans. To
that end, the organization should test bench strength, establish an unequivocal
internal promotion policy to ensure internal promotion when appropriate,
prepare individual development plans (IDPs) to close the gap between what
individuals presently do and what they must do to qualify for promotion, and
use internal development when appropriate to realize the learning objectives
established on IDPs.
But internal promotion and internal development are not the only means
by which succession planning and management needs can be met. Alternative
means, which usually fall outside the realm of succession planning and management,
are treated in the next chapter. In these days of business process
reengineering and process improvement, those involved in succession planning
and management should have some awareness of approaches to meeting
work requirements other than traditional succession methods relying on job
movements.

C H A P T E R 1 1
ASSESSING ALTERNATIVES TO
INTERNAL DEVELOPMENT
The traditional approach is to prepare successors for key positions internally.
Some descriptions of succession planning and management (SP&M) treat it as
nothing more than a form of replacement planning. In this process, several
key assumptions are usually made: (1) key positions will be replaced whenever
a vacancy occurs; (2) employees already working in the organization—and
often within the function—will be the prime source of replacements; and (3)
a key measure of effectiveness is the percentage of key positions that can be
filled from within, with minimal delay and uproar, whenever a vacancy occurs.
Some organizations add a fourth: the relative racial and sexual diversity of
replacements should be enhanced so that protected labor groups are well
represented among the qualified replacements for key positions prepared internally.
A systematic approach to SP&M has major advantages, of course. First, it
makes succession predictable. Each time a vacancy in a key position occurs,
people know precisely what to do: find a replacement. Second, since a high
percentage of successors are assumed to be employed by the organization,
investments in employee development can be justified to minimize losses in
productivity and turnover.
However, when SP&M is treated in this way it can occasionally become a
mindless exercise in ‘‘filling in the blank name on the organization chart.’’
Concern about that should be sufficient to lead strategists to explore innovative
alternatives to the traditional replacement-from-within mentality. This
chapter focuses on those alternatives—and on when they should be used instead
of the traditional approach to SP&M.
The Need to Manage for ‘‘Getting the Work Done’’ Rather
than ‘‘Managing Succession’’
‘‘The natural response to a problem,’’ writes James L. Adams in Conceptual
Blockbusting, ‘‘seems to be to try to get rid of it by finding an answer—often
taking the first answer that occurs and pursuing it because of one’s reluctance
257

258 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
to spend the time and mental effort needed to conjure up a richer storehouse
of alternatives from which to choose. This hit-and-run approach to problemsolving
begets all sorts of oddities.’’ 1
Succession planning and management can fall victim to the same natural
response to which Adams refers: Whenever a vacancy occurs, the organization
is confronted with a problem. The ‘‘natural response’’ is to find an immediate
replacement. There may also be a tendency to ‘‘clone the incumbent’’—that
is, find someone who resembles the incumbent in order to minimize the need
to make adjustments to a new person. But replacement is not always appropriate.
Consider a replacement unnecessary when any one of the questions
listed below can be answered yes. (Review the flowchart appearing in Exhibit
11-1 as a simplified aid in helping with this decision process.)
Question 1: Is the Key Position No Longer Necessary?
A replacement is not necessary when a key position is no longer worth doing.
In that situation, a ‘‘key’’ position is no longer ‘‘key.’’ Decision-makers can
simply choose not to fill the key position when a vacancy occurs. Of course, if
this question is answered no, then a replacement may still have to be found.
Question 2: Can a Key Position Be Rendered Unnecessary by Finding New Ways to Achieve
Comparable Results?
A replacement may not be necessary if key work outcomes can be achieved
in new ways. In this sense, then, SP&M can be affected by business process
reengineering, defined by best-selling authors Michael Hammer and James
Champy as ‘‘the fundamental rethinking and radical redesign of business processes
to achieve dramatic improvements in critical, contemporary measures of
performance, such as cost, quality, service, and speed.’’ 2 If the organization
can reengineer work processes and thereby eliminate positions that were once
key to an old process, then replacing a key job incumbent will be unnecessary.
In short, key positions may be reengineered out of existence.
To that end, try applying the model suggested by Rummler and Brache to
process improvement 3 :
1. Identify the critical business issue or process that is to be reexamined.
2. Select critical processes related to the issue or subprocesses.
3. Select a leader and members for a process improvement team.
4. Train the team on process improvement methods.
5. Develop ‘‘is’’ maps to show the relationship between where and how
work flows into a system, how it is transformed through work methods,
and where it goes when the products or services are provided to
the ‘‘customers.’’
(text continues on page 265)

Assessing Alternatives to Internal Development
259
Exhibit 11-1. Deciding When Replacing a Key Job Incumbent Is
Unnecessary: A Flowchart
Is the key
position
no longer
necessary?
Yes
Do not fill the key
position. Leave it vacant.
No
Can a key position
be rendered unnecessary
by finding new
ways to achieve comparable
results?
Yes
Do not fill the key position.
Apply reengineering to
achieve the same results.
No
Can a key position
be rendered unnecessary
by redistributing
the duties to a team in
the same part of the
organization?
Yes
Are the members of
the same part
of the organization
capable of working
together as a team?
No
No
Yes
(continues)

260 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 11-1. (continued)
Use team
building.
Are members of
the same part of the
organization capable
of absorbing the
extra duties without
sacrificing productivity
in their present job
duties?
No
Review work
priorities.
Yes
Form team(s) and
do not replace the
key position.

Assessing Alternatives to Internal Development
261
Yes
Can a key
position be
rendered unnecessary
by reallocating
the duties to other
parts of the
organization?
No
Do members of
other parts of the
organization possess the
neccessary expertise to
carry out the work?
No
Provide
training if
time allows.
Otherwise,
use another
approach.
Yes
No
Are members of
another part of the
organization capable
of absorbing the
extra duties without
sacrificing productivity
in their present job
duties?
Review work
priorities.
Yes
(continues)

262 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 11-1. (continued)
Reallocate the work of the
key position to another
part of the organization.
Can a key position be
rendered unnecessary by
outsourcing the work?
Yes
Is the work critical to
the continued survival
of the organization?
Yes
No
Replace the
key position
incumbent.
No
Yes
Is organizational
control essential to
meeting stringent
work or quality
requirements?
Replace the
key position
incumbent.
No

Assessing Alternatives to Internal Development
263
Outsource the job duties of
the key position.
Can a key position be
rendered unnecessary
by using flexible
staffing approaches?
Yes
Yes
Is the work critical to
the survival of the
organization?
No
Replace the
key position
incumbent.
No
Yes
Is organizational
control essential to
meeting stringent
work or quality
requirements?
No
Replace the
key position
incumbent.
Use flexible staffing
approaches to achieve
the results desired from
the key position.
(continues)

264 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 11-1. (continued)
Can combining the
approaches listed above
render unnecessary the
need for a replacement
in a key position?
Yes
Decide which strategies to
combine. Divide up work
requirements as necessary
and use different strategies
to meet them. Do not
replace the key position
incumbent.
No
Use the traditional
approach to succession
planning, striving to
replace the key job
incumbent—probably
from within.

Assessing Alternatives to Internal Development
265
6. Find ‘‘disconnects,’’ which are missing, redundant, or illogical factors
that could affect the critical business issue or the process.
7. Analyze the disconnects.
8. Develop a ‘‘should’’ map to present a more efficient or effective
method of handling the work.
9. Establish measures or standards for what is desired.
10. Recommend changes.
11. Implement the changes.
In essence, the same steps described above can be used to determine whether
there are ways to ‘‘engineer a key position out of existence.’’ If there is, then
no successor will be needed. (However, the work process may be broken up
and reallocated, necessitating new competencies for those who absorb the
new duties.)
Question 3: Can a Key Position Be Rendered Unnecessary by Redistributing the Duties to
aTeam?
If the answer is yes, then it should be possible to achieve the same work results
by placing responsibility in a team of workers from the same function or work
unit. However, two caveats should be considered. First, if the workers have
never functioned as a team, then they will probably require team-building and
training on team skills to work as a cohesive group. Second, if prospective
team members are already working at—or beyond—their individual capacities,
then loading additional duties on a team will not be successful.
Question 4: Can a Key Position Be Rendered Unnecessary by Reallocating the Duties to
Other Parts of the Organization?
In short, is it possible to avoid filling a key position by reorganizing, moving
the work responsibility to another function or organizational unit? If the answer
is yes, then replacing a key job incumbent may prove to be unnecessary.
But, as in redistributing work to a team in the same part of the organization,
assess whether the inheritors of key position duties are trained adequately to
perform the work and can do them without sacrificing productivity in their
present jobs. If both conditions can be met, consider moving responsibilities
to another part of the organization to avoid replacing a key job incumbent.
Question 5: Can a Key Position Be Rendered Unnecessary by Outsourcing the Work?
If the answer is yes, then replacing a key job incumbent may be unnecessary.
The same results may be achieved more cost-effectively than by replacing a key
job incumbent. Pay particular attention to two key issues when answering the
question: criticality and control. If the work is critical to the continued sur-

266 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
vival of the organization, then outsourcing it may be unwise because that may
vest too much influence in an individual or group having little or no stake in
the organization’s continued survival. If the work must meet stringent, specialized
requirements for which few external sources can be found, then outsourcing
may also prove to be unwise because controlling the activities of an
external contractor may become as time-consuming as performing the work
in-house.
Question 6: Can a Key Position Be Rendered Unnecessary by Using Flexible Staffing
Approaches?
Can the same results be achieved through the use of permanent part-time or
temporary part-time staff, rotating employees, or internships? If the answer is
yes, then replacing a key job incumbent may be unnecessary. However, as in
outsourcing, pay attention to criticality and control. If the work is critical to
the continued survival of the organization, then using innovative staffing approaches
may prove to be unwise because that will grant too much influence
to an individual or group with little or no stake in the organization’s existence.
If the work must meet stringent, specialized requirements that require mastery,
then part-time talent may not be able to achieve or maintain that mastery.
Question 7: Can Combining the Approaches Listed Above Obviate the Need for a
Replacement in a Key Position?
In other words, is it possible to split apart the key results or outcomes desired
from the key position and handle them separately—through reengineering,
team-based management, organizational redesign, or other means? If that
question can be answered yes, then it should be possible to ensure that the
organization achieves the same results as those provided by the key job incumbent—but
without the need for a replacement. Use the worksheet in Exhibit
11-2 to decide when it is possible to answer yes to any one—or all—of the
questions listed above.
Innovative Approaches to Tapping the Retiree Base
Succession planning and management is not an all-or-nothing proposition. It
is also possible to meet staffing needs to get the work done by tapping the
very group that is causing some of the problems—that is, baby boomers who
are nearing retirement. And that is also not an all-or-nothing proposition in
the sense that discouraging people from retiring, while one option, is not the
only way to tap into the power of those who are eligible to retire.
The word retire—taken from the Middle French word retirer (which
means ‘‘to draw back’’)—is being reinvented now. Much evidence exists to
support that. 4 Older workers are delaying their retirement due to a rollercoaster
stock market and eroding health insurance coverage, which is (in turn)

Assessing Alternatives to Internal Development
267
Exhibit 11-2. A Worksheet for Identifying Alternatives to the Traditional
Approach to Succession Planning and Management
Directions: Use this worksheet to help you identify alternatives to the traditional approach
to succession planning—that is, promoting from within the organization and
within the function.
In the first space below, identify by title the key position that you are examining. Then
answer the questions about it appearing in the left column of the second space
below. Write your responses in the right column, making notes about ways by which
you can use alternatives to the traditional approach to succession planning. When
you finish, share your responses with others in the organization for their thoughts—
and, if possible, to compare their comments to yours. Add paper if necessary.
There are no ‘‘right’’ or ‘‘wrong’’ answers to this activity; rather, the aim is to provide
you with an aid to creative ways by which to meet succession planning needs.
Space One: What is the key position? (Provide a job title.)
Questions About the Key
Position
Question Responses
(Describe ideas to avoid
simple replacement
from
within.)
Is the key position no
longer necessary?
Can a key position be
rendered unnecessary
by finding new ways to
achieve comparable results?
(continues)

268 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 11-2. (continued)
Questions About the Key
Position
Can a key position be
rendered unnecessary
by redistributing the duties
to a team in the
same part of the organization?
Question Responses
(Describe ideas to avoid
simple replacement
from
within)
Can a key position be
rendered unnecessary
by reallocating the duties
to other parts of the
organization?
Can a key position be
rendered unnecessary
by outsourcing the
work?
Can a key position be
rendered unnecessary
by using flexible staffing
approaches?
Can combining the approaches
listed above
eliminate the need for a
replacement in a key position?

Assessing Alternatives to Internal Development
269
eroding the value of their pension packages. Some observers of the business
scene even doubt that a talent shortage will appear. 5 At the same time, employers
do not want to experience the confusion that results from filling tough-tofill
positions with green, off-the-street (or at least untested) hires. One researcher
found that only 12 to 16 percent of retirees currently work past retirement
but that 80 percent of baby boomers intend to do so. 6
If you say ‘‘reinvent retirement’’ today to most employers, the first thing
that crosses their minds is to discourage experienced workers from exercising
their retirement option when eligible or else to call retired people back to fulltime
work. But many other options exist, and reinventing retirement means
tapping the retiree base in creative ways to meet the organization’s short-term
and long-term talent needs.
There are actually many ways that retirees could be tapped. They can be
temps; contingent workers; consultants; teleworkers or telecommuters; assigned
to special projects, perhaps at distant (even international) locations; or
assigned as coaches or mentors for their successors. Many other options are
also possible (see Exhibit 11-3).
Tapping the retiree base will be a challenge for the future. A first step is to
establish who wants to do what, who wants to work when and how, and how
to find and tap the talents of retirees on demand. That will require creative
applications of exit interviews, conducted with retirees, and periodic followups
with retirees to see if they have changed their minds about the work options
available to them. It will also require better competency or talent inventories
to find the competencies that retirees possess and tap them creatively
on short notice. It will also require new management approaches, since retirees
may have lower tolerance for arbitrary management practices than others.
Deciding What to Do
There is no foolproof way to integrate SP&M with alternatives to replacement
from within. The important point is to make sure that alternatives to simple
replacement are considered. Often, that responsibility will rest with HR generalists,
HRD specialists, SP&M coordinators, and even CEOs or others who bear
major responsibility for succession planning and management. A good strategy
is to raise the issue at two different—and opportune—times: (1) during review
meetings to identify successors; and (2) on the occasions when a vacancy occurs
in a key position and permission is sought to fill it.
During the review process, ask operating managers how they plan to meet
replacement needs. At that time, raise the alternatives, and ask them to consider
other possibilities as well. Be sure that only key positions are being considered
in succession planning and management efforts in order to focus
attention on areas of critical need.
When a vacancy occurs—or is about to occur—in a key position, raise the

Exhibit 11-3. A Tool for Contemplating Ten Ways to Tap the Retiree Base
Directions: Use this worksheet to guide your thinking on how the retiree base of your organization might be more effectively
tapped to shore up talent needs. In any given situation when your organization is facing a talent need or shortage wrought by
a retirement, consider each of the strategies listed below. For each way to use the retiree base to solve the problem, indicate
whether it might be appropriate to that situation by checking yes, no, or maybe. Make remarks in the right column about
whether two or more alternatives might be combined.
Ways of Tapping the Retiree Base
to Meet a Talent Need
Could the work be accomplished by:
Is This Approach
Appropriate to the
Situation?
Yes
No
Maybe
1 Calling in retirees for full-time employment?
2 Calling in retirees for ‘‘permanent part-time’’ employment?
3 Calling retirees ‘‘as needed’’?
4 Giving the retirees virtual work to do?
5 Giving retirees cell phones and putting them ‘‘on call’’ to
coach their replacements when needed?
6 Hiring retirees as coaches for those who are really not ready
for the promotions they are given?
7 Giving retirees computers and having them do virtual
coaching by ‘‘instant messaging’’ as needed?
8 Tapping retirees as onsite or online trainers?
9 Hiring retirees to document procedures or other information
that they know?
10 Hiring retirees as consultants?
11 Other (Specify: )
Remarks: Can Two or
More Alternatives Be
Combined?

Assessing Alternatives to Internal Development
271
issue again. Ask operating managers what alternatives to simple replacement
they have considered. Briefly review some of them to ensure that succession
is driven by work requirements and not by custom, resistance to change, or
other issues that may be needlessly costly or inefficient.
Summary
This chapter has reviewed alternatives to traditional replacement from within.
Alternatives may be used when any one or all of the following questions may
be answered yes:
1. Is the key position no longer necessary?
2. Can a key position be rendered unnecessary by finding new ways to
achieve comparable results?
3. Can a key position be rendered unnecessary by redistributing the duties
to a team in the same part of the organization?
4. Can a key position be rendered unnecessary by reallocating the duties
to other parts of the organization?
5. Can a key position be rendered unnecessary by outsourcing the work?
6. Can a key position be rendered unnecessary by using flexible staffing
approaches?
7. Can combining the approaches listed above obviate the need for a replacement
in a key position?
8. Can the retiree base be tapped for a qualified replacement?
Pose these questions during review meetings to identify successors and on the
occasions when a vacancy occurs in a key position. Be sure that key positions
are filled only when absolutely necessary to achieve essential work requirements
and to meet the organization’s real strategic objectives.

C H A P T E R 1 2
USING TECHNOLOGY TO SUPPORT
SUCCESSION PLANNING AND
MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
The Internet and the World Wide Web have profoundly influenced the world.
That fact is as true for succession planning and management (SP&M) practices
as for anything else. Many organizations are in a competitive race to enter
e-commerce, or to consolidate the competitive edge they are already acquiring
from it.
Online and high-tech approaches have also had a dramatic impact on succession
planning and management practices. This chapter focuses attention
on four key questions: (1) How are online and high-tech methods defined? (2)
In what areas of succession planning and management can online and hightech
methods be applied? (3) How are online and high-tech applications used?
and (4) What specialized competencies are required by succession planning
coordinators to use these applications?
Defining Online and High-Tech Methods
An online method relies on the Internet, a company or organizational intranet,
an extranet, or the World Wide Web. Examples of online methods range from
traditional print-based electronic mail to Web-based multimedia productions
that integrate print, sound effects, music, animation, still graphics, and video.
A high-tech method is anything other than an online method that substitutes
technology for face-to-face interpersonal interaction. Examples of high-tech
methods include videoconferencing or audio-teleconferencing.
One way to conceptualize online and high-tech methods is to think of
them as existing on one continuum ranging from simple to complex and on a
second continuum ranging from noninteractive to fully interactive, as depicted
in Exhibit 12-1. Simple methods are usually easy to design and inexpensive to
use. Complex methods are usually difficult to design and are often expensive
to design and use. Noninteractive methods do not involve people in real time,
while interactive methods require people to participate actively. These distinctions
are important when planning and budgeting the use of online and hightech
methods. The most complex or interactive methods often necessitate spe-
272

273 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 12-1. Continua of Online and High-Tech Approaches
Simple
Complex
Noninteractive Electronic mail Online help with forms
Web-based documents Policies, procedures, in-
Audiotape-based train- structions, forms, or ining
or instructions
struments distributed by
Videotape-based train- disk or CD-ROM
ing or instructions
Interactive Print surveys sent elec- Groupware
tronically Interactive television
Print surveys completed Multimedia training
over the Web
material
PC-based Virtual reality applicaaudioteleconference
tions
PC-based videoteleconference
cial skills in the design process and are more expensive and time-consuming
to plan and use.
The software to support succession planning and management is becoming
increasingly sophisticated. Nontechnical users who are tasked with sourcing
the right technology to support the organization’s operations in this area
face a daunting task. And the information is not necessarily easy to come by.
Much time can be spent just trying to find what software is available and compare
their features. A good approach is to clarify what your organization plans
to do with the software and then find a product that will best meet the needs.
Use the rating sheet in Exhibit 12-2 as a starting point to define what is needed.
I have found that some popular vendors on the market are the following
(this is not a product endorsement):
▲ Talent Management by AIM (see www.aimworld.com/AIMtalent.html)
▲ Succession by Business Decisions, Inc. (see www.businessdecisions
.com/)
▲ HRSoft by Executrack (see www.hrsoft.com/)
▲ Click XG Workforce by PeopleClik (see www.peopleclick.com/ )
▲ Succession Pulse by Pilat (see www.pilat-hr.com/solutions/succession
.html)
▲ Workforce Performance Management by Success Factors (see www.suc
cessfactors.com/index.php)
▲ Human Capital Management by Softscape (see www.softscape.com/us/
home.htm)
(text continues on page 277)

Exhibit 12-2. A Starting Point for a Rating Sheet to Assess Vendors for Succession Planning and Management
Software
Directions: Use this rating sheet as a starting point to develop your own rating sheet to assess various software vendors for
succession planning and management software. Note that there are three sections. The first section asks you to rate the software
product. The second section asks you to rate the vendor. The third section allows you to provide any additional comments you
wish to provide. For each criterion listed in the left column below, gather sufficient evidence to rate the vendor in the center
column according to the following ratings: 0 Not Applicable; 1 Not Acceptable; 2 Somewhat Unacceptable; 3
Somewhat Acceptable; 4 Fully Acceptable. In the right column, provide notes to explain your scores. If you rate the vendor
as anything less than fully acceptable, provide a justification in the right column.
Is the software:
1. Compatible with other
software that your
company uses—or can it
be made compatible with
relative ease?
N/A
Not
Acceptable
Part I: The Software
Somewhat
Unacceptable
Somewhat
Acceptable
Fully
Acceptable
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
2. Simple to use? 0 1 2 3 4
3. Browser-based? 0 1 2 3 4
4. Capable of giving different
levels of access to different
types of users?
0 1 2 3 4
Justification

5. Able to provide the kind of
reports that you or others
will want?
6. Capable of being
customized for individuals,
such as your CEO?
7. Capable of providing the
level of security that you
want?
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
8. Competitively priced? 0 1 2 3 4
9. Priced with upgrades? 0 1 2 3 4
10. Well-matched to the needs
your organization plans to
meet with it?
0 1 2 3 4
Does the vendor:
1. Have a good track record
with other clients?
2. Provide the support your
organization will need?
Part II: The Vendor
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
3. Respond to requests? 0 1 2 3 4
(continues)

Exhibit 12-2. (continued)
4. Know enough about succession
planning and
management to be
helpful?
5. Provide the level of support
your organization needs/
wants?
6. Provide a range of solutions
and avoid a ‘‘onesize-fits-all’’
approach?
7. Provide training you or
others might need?
Now add up the scores.
The higher the score, the more
acceptable it is:
N/A
Not
Acceptable
Somewhat
Unacceptable
Somewhat
Acceptable
Fully
Acceptable
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
0 1 2 3 4
Total
Part III: Your Additional Comments
Justification

Using Technology to Support Succession Planning and Management Programs
277
For additional help, check out the current Buyer’s Guide to Talent Management
Systems, which could be found (at the time this book goes to press) at
http://shop.hr.com/products/ICGReport_TalentMS.asp. Of course, many more
software packages are out there.
Where to Apply Technology Methods
To state the issue simply, online and high-tech methods can be applied to
almost any area of an SP&M program. Such methods may be used in: (1) formulating
SP&M program policy, procedures, and action plans; (2) assessing
present work or competency requirements; (3) evaluating current employee
performance; (4) determining future work or competency requirements; (5)
assessing potential; (6) closing developmental gaps; (7) maintaining talent inventories;
and (8) evaluating the program. Of course, online and high-tech
methods can also be used for communicating details of a succession program
and providing training and skill building, or even real-time coaching. They
substitute virtual interaction for face-to-face interaction. The maddening thing
about them is that they date so quickly. Almost nothing today changes as fast
as technological innovations.
How to Evaluate and Use Technology Applications
To use online and high-tech applications in SP&M programs, you can use a
hierarchy of applications, such as presented in Exhibit 12-3. The subsections
below first describe the hierarchy and then provide specifics about how to
apply online and high-tech methods to an SP&M program.
A Hierarchy of Applications
Researching secondary information is the first, and lowest, level of online and
high-tech applications for SP&M. You can use the Web—or your organization’s
human resource information systems (HRIS)—to collect and analyze information
that is readily available. Use secondary information of this kind to look for
articles, books, or Web sites about best practices and research on succession
issues. Surf the Web, using search engines or metasearch engines (see a full
list of metasearch engines at www.searchiq.com/directory/multi.htm), around
key words or phrases linked to succession planning. Conduct analyses of your
organization’s workforce using your organizational HR information system
about such important issues as the ages of your workers at various levels (executive,
managerial, professional, and technical) and their projected retirement
ages, their racial or gender composition, performance ratings, turnover rates,
absenteeism, and other information. Try to use this information to answer
such questions as these:

278 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 12-3. A Hierarchy of Online and High-Tech Applications for
Succession Planning and Management
Interactive
and
Multimedia
Distribution
and Delivery
Policy Formulation
Original Data Collection for
Policy Formulation
Benchmarking/Comparison-Making
with Other Organizations
Document Distribution
Document Storage and Retrieval
Researching Secondary Information
▲ How many people exist at each level of the organization and in each
important occupational or hierarchical grouping?
▲ When are those people expected to retire?
▲ What percentage of those people fall into protected labor classes?
▲ What is the turnover rate by level?
▲ What is the critical turnover rate by level?
▲ How well are people performing?
▲ How many potential candidates for succession exist at each level, and
how many potential candidates may be needed to exist to support the
organization’s expected growth?

Using Technology to Support Succession Planning and Management Programs
279
In each case, these questions involve analysis of existing information. This is
the lowest level of the hierarchy of applications, and it is also the easiest to
use, provided that the necessary records exist and can be manipulated in ways
permitting analysis.
Document storage and retrieval is the second level of the hierarchy. Online
methods are often useful for storing and retrieving documents important
to SP&M such as job descriptions, competency models, value statements, performance
appraisal forms, potential assessments, and replacement charts. As
organizations move toward realizing the promise of the paperless office, document
storage and retrieval becomes more important. Document imaging permits
hard copy to be scanned and kept electronically.
Document distribution is the third level of the hierarchy. This level adds
interactivity and permits SP&M coordinators to place documents online. For
instance, from company Web sites, users can download documents such as
job descriptions, job analysis questionnaires or interview guides, competency
models, performance appraisal forms, individual potential assessment forms,
individual development plans, and even training for advancement. Additionally,
users may even complete the forms online and send them to SP&M coordinators
so that the transactions are paperless. Data can then be analyzed
directly online. (That also improves data security.)
Benchmarking is the fourth level of the hierarchy. While the third level
permits document distribution and analysis within an organization, benchmarking
permits information sharing among organizations. For instance, a
succession planning coordinator in one organization can send electronic questionnaires—or
even sample documents, such as succession planning policies—to
consultants, college professors, or SP&M coordinators in other
organizations. That permits easy comparisons and discussions of important
issues across organizations.
Original data collection for policy formulation is the fifth level of the
hierarchy. Using online survey software, for instance, SP&M coordinators can
poll managers, workers, and other stakeholders about emerging problems that
affect succession planning. For instance, an attitude survey could be conducted
periodically online to gather information about employee job satisfaction
(which can affect or even help to predict turnover rates), attitudes about
existing succession practices, and other relevant issues. This information is
valuable in formulating new policies or revising existing policies.
Policy formulation is the sixth level of the hierarchy. Decision-makers can
use groupware—software that links individuals virtually for decision making
in real time—to formulate new policies on issues affecting SP&M. For instance,
during policy formulation, decision-makers can work together on virtual teams
to establish a new or revised succession policy, devise a competency model,
prepare a job description, plan training to close developmental gaps, carry out
potential assessment or performance appraisal, or offer confidential advice on
a difficult succession issue.

Using Technology to Support Succession Planning and Management Programs
280
Interactive and multimedia distribution and delivery is the seventh and
highest level of the hierarchy. This is usually the most complex, and often
the most expensive, to create. It includes multimedia training prepared and
delivered over the Web or over a company intranet. It also includes CD-ROMbased
training designed to build competencies to prepare people for advancement
and other high-tech methods, such as desktop video, that can link decision-makers
in discussions about individual development or about SP&M
policy issues.
Use the worksheet in Exhibit 12-4 to brainstorm when and how to use
online and high-tech methods according to the hierarchy of applications described
in this section.
Formulating Policy, Procedures, and Action Plans
Recall from earlier in this book that an important starting point for any SP&M
program is a policy to guide the program, as well as procedures and action
plans to implement the program. Lacking those, decision-makers will probably
not share the same views about what results are to be achieved, how they are
to be achieved, or even why the program exists. The process of formulating
SP&M program policy, procedures, and action plans is important because the
process is key to gaining stakeholder ownership and understanding.
Online and high-tech methods can be helpful in formulating policy, procedures,
and action plans. It is not always necessary, of course, to formulate
policies in face-to-face meetings. Some (and on occasion all) of the work can
be done online, and some work can be done by virtual teams when decisionmakers
are geographically scattered.
Groupware can bring stakeholders together to make a decision in real
time. (For an example of groupware that can be downloaded for free, see
http://teamwave.com/.) Some people can be in the United States; some can be
in Europe; some can be in South America; some can be in Australia; and some
can be in Asia. But they all assemble online at the same time and focus attention
on discussing and reaching conclusions about key issues.
High-tech methods can also be used. Conference calls are probably the
simplest of these methods. Users discuss succession policies, procedures, and
action plans over the phone. To hold down costs, such calls can be made over
personal computers by using software such as netphone (see www.sonomasystems.com/news/netphone.htm).
With the advent of small and inexpensive video cameras that can be
attached to the top of personal computers or even to laptops, and the easy
availability of software to link those cameras (such as Microsoft’s Netmeeting,
available for download at www.microsoft.com/windows/netmeeting/), decision-makers
can meet from their desktops from almost anywhere. Netmeeting
permits real-time video and audioconferencing, graphics collaboration through
a whiteboard feature, text conversations through a chat feature, an Internet
directory for reaching others, a file transfer feature to permit document swap-
(text continues on page 283)

Exhibit 12-4. A Worksheet for Brainstorming When and How to Use Online and High-Tech Methods
Directions: Use this worksheet to help you brainstorm when and how to use various online and high-tech methods in your
organization’s SP&M program. For each area of SP&M listed in the left column below, jot down ideas under the appropriate
headers in the right column on ways that your organization may appropriately and effectively use the online and high-tech
approaches described. Add paper if necessary.
Area of Succession
Planning and
Management
1 Formulating SP&M
Policy
Researching
Secondary
Information
Notes on When and How to Use Online and High-Tech Approaches
Document
Storage and
Retrieval
Document
Distribution
Benchmarking
Original
Data
Collection for
Policy
Formulation
Policy
Formulation
Interactive and
Multimedia
Distribution
and
Delivery
2 Assessing Present
Work/people Requirements
3 Evaluating Current
Employee Performance
(continues)

Exhibit 12-4. (continued)
4 Determining Future
Work/People Requirements
5 Assessing Potential
6 Closing Developmental
Gaps
7 Maintaining Talent
Inventories
8 Evaluating the Program
9 Others (list below)

Using Technology to Support Succession Planning and Management Programs
283
ping in real time, program sharing, and many other features. In short, Netmeeting
provides most of the advantages of a face-to-face meeting and some
that cannot be obtained in such a meeting.
Experienced videoconferencing users, however, have learned that it is advisable
to test the equipment and software before the scheduled meeting time
to make sure that it works. They have also learned that a meeting agenda
should be sent out beforehand with short questions intended to keep the
meeting focused. Meetings should be kept short, since participants find that
watching compressed video can be tedious. The number of callers should be
kept to a minimum, since multiple sites can be difficult to manage in videoconferencing.
What are some tips to make these meetings most effective? Here are a few:
▲ Make sure the time schedules are clear, especially when callers are located
in different time zones.
▲ Open all meetings with introductions so that everyone knows who is
there, why they are there, and what they can contribute.
▲ Keep the structure of the meeting simple. If difficult decisions are to be
made, provide material in advance and ask people to review it before
the meeting.
▲ Send out, by e-mail, sample policies, procedures, and action plans governing
succession planning and invite participants to focus their attention
on them. Sample documents tend to focus attention faster.
▲ Schedule follow-up discussions to resolve differences of opinion rather
than trying to iron them out in a videoconference.
▲ Make sure everyone has contact information for everyone else, such as
e-mail addresses, so that people can discuss important issues of interest
among themselves later.
Assessing Present Work Requirements
Assessing present work requirements is a second important component of any
effective SP&M program. People cannot prepare for the future if they do not
know what is expected of them at present.
Traditionally, present work requirements have been assessed in several
ways. One way is for the supervisor to write a job description. Another way is
for a specialist in the human resources department to interview one or more
job incumbents and their supervisors, draft a job description, and then ask for
a review by those interviewed. Online and high-tech approaches have added
new dimensions to this process. It is now possible to send worksheets or questionnaires
for preparing job descriptions as attached documents from one location.
Supervisors or HR specialists can then draft job descriptions and send
them around electronically for supervisors or HR specialists and job incum-

284 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
bents to review and modify, make corrections, and reach agreement virtually.
Alternatively, audioconferences or videoconferences can be substituted for
face-to-face meetings.
Additionally, many resources now exist to help the harried HR specialist or
supervisor write job descriptions. For instance, supervisors or HR specialists
can invest in software such as Descriptions Now! (see www.gneil.com/item
.html?s-5040&i-21&pos-2&sessionid-S9nac7q435), which provides draft language
for job descriptions and helps the user draft newspaper advertisements
to recruit applicants. As an alternative, supervisors or HR specialists can find
thousands of free job descriptions on the Web as a starting point for discussion
and for ideas in preparing them. As just one example, visit www.stepfour.com/
jobs/ to find 12,741 job descriptions from the Dictionary of Occupational
Titles arranged in alphabetical order. Also visit ONet, which is the electronic
system that is replacing The Dictionary of Occupational Titles. Real-time training
on the Web is also available to help supervisors or workers learn how to
write job descriptions. (See www.siu.edu/ humres/doitright/descrip.html.)
The important point to remember is that no online substitute exists for
reaching agreement among supervisors, incumbents, and HR specialists on
what are the current work requirements, why they are necessary for success in
the job, and how they can be met. In other words, online and high-tech approaches
should be used as supplements, not as substitutes, for traditional job
analysis, competency identification, and other approaches to assessing present
work requirements.
Evaluating Current Employee Performance
A third important component of any effective succession planning program is
some means of evaluating current employee performance. As noted earlier in
the book, people are rarely considered for promotion—or any other advancement
opportunity, for that matter—if they are not performing well in their
current jobs. Of course, a good performance appraisal system should measure
individual performance as it relates to work requirements, standards, performance
targets or expectations, or behavioral indicators tied to job competencies.
Traditionally, the process of evaluating current employee performance has
been handled with paper forms that are completed and then followed up on
by means of face-to-face interviews between workers and their immediate supervisors.
Often, the human resources department is responsible for establishing
the process by which individual performance is appraised. The information
gathered in this process is, in turn, used in making wage or salary determinations,
identifying training or individual development needs, and planning for
future improvement.
Online and high-tech approaches have added new dimensions to this process.
It is now possible to solicit, through e-mail or Web sites, opinions of other
people about an individual’s performance. For instance, a performance appraisal
form may be sent for input to (among others) an individual’s orga-

Using Technology to Support Succession Planning and Management Programs
285
nizational superiors, peers, subordinates, customers, company suppliers, and
company distributors.
Additionally, software resources now exist that can help supervisors write
performance appraisals. For instance, supervisors or HR specialists can invest
in software such as Performance Now! (available at the time this book goes
to press at www.gneil.com/item.html?s-5040&i-20&pos-8&sessionid-S9nac7q-
435) that supplies draft language for employee performance appraisals and
can offer legal advice about what is and is not advisable to put in writing on
appraisal forms. Free resources can also be found on the Web to support the
formulation of policies on employee performance appraisal (such as, for instance,
sample policies available at the time this book goes to press at http://
ukcc.uky.edu/hrinfo/hrp/hrp061.txt, www.tempe.gov/hradmin/docs/Perf--Appr--
Inst.htm, and www.infosys.ilstu.edu/ohr/PAexempt.html); complete appraisal
systems for a fee (available when this book goes to press at www.performanceappraisal.com/manual/download.htm);
and sample forms (available when this
book goes to press at http://fcn.state.fl.us/dms/hrm/forms/forms.html and http://
ohioline.ag.ohio-state.edu/hrm-fact/0007.html).
Using online and high-tech methods with employee performance appraisal
can be beneficial. However, SP&M coordinators should always remember that
every useful performance appraisal system comes at a price. This means that,
while online aids can be helpful and can offer valuable support, no substitute
exists for the laborious process of establishing and measuring the unique performance
requirements of people in one organization.
Determining Future Work Requirements
Forecasting or planning for future work requirements is a fourth important
component of any effective SP&M program. After all, it is no more likely that
work requirements will remain static than it is that the organization itself will
remain static. Organizational needs change, and so do work requirements. It
is therefore important to engage stakeholders and decision-makers in planning
for the expected changes that may occur in the organization and in its
work requirements. That is essential if individuals are to be prepared to meet
those requirements in the future. Few organizations regularly and systematically
forecast future work or competency requirements. However, the need to
do that is growing. It is simply not possible to prepare people if future work
requirements remain unknown.
Online and high-tech approaches have, however, provided new approaches
to job forecasting, scenario planning, and future-oriented competency
modeling. Job forecasting estimates future job requirements. It may
address such questions as these:
▲ What will be the future purpose of the job? How will that be different
from the job’s present purpose?

286 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
▲ What are the expected work duties or responsibilities of the job in the
future, and how are they expected to change?
▲ What knowledge, skills, or attitudes are needed by individuals in the
future to qualify for those jobs?
▲ How important will be the various duties or responsibilities of those
jobs, and which ones will be considered most critical to success in the
future?
Answering such questions is the process of job forecasting.
Scenario planning identifies possible alternative futures. Instead of assuming
that jobs or work will change in one way, as job forecasting does, scenario
planning offers probabilities. Scenarios resemble written stories about the future.
They help people plan by giving them clear descriptions of what the
future may look like, or different pictures of various futures. Groupware, described
in an earlier section, can be useful as an online approach to conducting
job scenario planning. It is thus possible to prepare different versions of
job descriptions for the future and then use those to stimulate planning among
job incumbents and their immediate organizational supervisors.
Another way to carry out scenario planning is to rely on software or Web
sites that make it relatively easier than it might otherwise be. One resource for
conducting scenario planning is the Web site of the Global Business Network
(found at the time this book goes to press at www.gbn.org/public/help/
map.htm). This Web site offers member services for conducting scenario planning.
While the key emphasis in most scenario planning is business planning
and financial analysis, it is possible to find help in doing job scenario planning.
Future-oriented competency modeling projects the future competencies
required by departments or job groups. Its focus, unlike traditional competency
modeling, is on what will set exemplary performers apart from fully
successful performers in the future. It is therefore future-oriented and is sometimes
based on trends.
Many resources exist to help SP&M coordinators conduct future-oriented
competency modeling. For instance, you can find a list of competencies
needed in businesses in the future by consulting http://cithr.cit.cornell.edu/
FutComp.html, or a compelling article about organizational core competencies
of the future at www.bah.de/viewpoints/insights/cmt_core_comp.html.
You can also purchase software for competency modeling, such as The Competence
Expert (described at the time this book goes to press at www.kravetz
.com/compexpert.html) or the Competency Coach for Windows (described at
www.coopercomm.com/ccchfact.htm) One other source is Kenneth Carlton
Cooper’s Effective Competency Modeling & Reporting (AMACOM, 2000),
which includes a working model on CD-ROM of Competency Coach for Windows.

Using Technology to Support Succession Planning and Management Programs
287
Assessing Potential
A fifth important component of any effective succession planning program is
some means by which to assess individual potential for the future. What is the
individual’s potential for advancement to higher levels of responsibility, or to
higher levels of technical expertise in his or her specialization? That is the
question answered by this component.
One approach that is increasingly used for potential assessment is fullcircle,
multirater feedback. Described in an earlier chapter, this involves assessing
an individual’s potential based on the perceptions of those surrounding
him or her in the organization. It is important to remember, however, that
potential assessment should be conducted in the context of work requirements.
In other words, an individual should not just be appraised for his or
her current abilities. Instead, he or she should be assessed for meeting future
job requirements or future competencies.
Both PC-usable software and Web-based full-circle, multirater assessment
instruments are widely available. To find many of them, it is only necessary to
type ‘‘360 assessment’’ into a search engine on the Web. But a word of caution
is again in order: most full-circle, multirater assessment instruments have been
based on competency models from other organizations. That means they are
not necessarily useful, applicable, or even appropriate in all corporate cultures.
To be most effective, a company-specific competency model must be
prepared for every department or every job category (such as supervisor, manager,
and executive). Potential assessment is useful only when done in this
way. Indeed, rating individual potential on competencies that are not company-specific
can lead to major mistakes and miscalculations. Hence, while
online and high-tech approaches can be useful, they should be used appropriately
to measure individual potential within a unique corporate culture.
Closing Developmental Gaps
Closing developmental gaps is a sixth important component of any effective
SP&M program. This component leads to an action plan to help individuals
narrow the gap between what they can do now and what they need to do
to advance. Individual development planning is the process by which this is
accomplished.
Although few software packages exist to support the individual development
planning process—in fact, I could find none after an extensive search on
the Web—many resources can be found on the Web to assist with the process.
For instance, sample forms can be found at the time this book goes to press at
www.johnco.cc.ks.us/acad/sd/sdidp.htm, http://www.grc.nasa.gov/WWW/OHR/
next6.htm, and www.hr.lanl.gov/CareerDevelopment/IDPs.htm. Sample policies
guiding the use of an individual development planning (IDP) form can
also be found at the time this book goes to press at www.lerc.nasa.gov/WWW/

288 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
ODT/idp.htm and http://ohr.gsfc.nasa.gov/DevGuide/idp.htm, and a sample
training plan about individual development planning can be found at http://
www.doleta.gov/ohrw2w/volume1/v1md11.htm.
Maintaining Talent Inventories
A seventh important component of any effective SP&M program is some means
by which to maintain talent or skill inventories. How can the organization keep
track of the knowledge, skills, and competencies of existing staff? That is the
question answered by talent or skill inventories. Organizations possessing no
means by which to inventory talent will have a difficult time locating qualified
people in the organization when vacancies occur in key positions or when
emergencies arise. Every organization should have some way to inventory its
talent.
Succession planning and management inventories may take two forms:
manual or automated. A manual system relies on paper files. It consists of
individual personnel files or specialized records, assembled especially for
SP&M, that take the form of a succession planning and management notebook
or Rolodex file. These files contain information relevant to making succession
decisions, such as:
▲ Descriptions of individual position duties or competencies (for instance,
a current position description)
▲ Individual employee performance appraisals
▲ Statements of individual career goals or career plans
▲ Summaries of individual qualifications (for instance, educational and
training records)
▲ Summaries of individual skills (for instance, a personal skill inventory
that details previous work experience and languages known) 1
Of course, other information may be added, such as individual potential assessment
forms and replacement planning charts.
A manual inventory will suffice for a small organization having neither specialized
expertise available to oversee SP&M activities nor resources available
for automated systems. A chief advantage is that most of the information is
filed in personnel files anyway, so no monumental effort is necessary to compile
information on individual employees. However, a manual inventory can
lead to difficulties in handling, storing, cross-referencing, and maintaining security
over numerous (and sometimes lengthy) forms. Even in a small organization,
these disadvantages can present formidable problems.
Even small organizations, however, can now gain access to relatively inexpensive
PC-based software that places much information at a manager’s (or HR
specialist’s) fingertips. One example is People Manager (see www.gneil.com/
item.html?s-5040&i-878&pos-5&sessionid-S9nac7q-43 5). A second is People-
Trak (see www.gneil.com/item.html?s-5040&i-695&pos-7&sessionid-S9nac7q-

Using Technology to Support Succession Planning and Management Programs
289
43 5). A third is !Trak-IT HR (see www.gneil.com/item.html?s-5040&i-591&pos-
17&sessionid-S9nac7q-4 35). Each software package permits some limited talent
inventorying that can be useful even in small businesses.
Automated inventories used in SP&M take any one of three typical forms:
(1) simple word processing files; (2) tailored SP&M software; or (3) SP&M
software integrated with other personnel records. Simple word processing
files are the next step beyond paper files. Special forms (templates) are created
for SP&M using a popular word processing program, such as Microsoft Word.
Blank forms are placed on disk or CD-ROM. Managers are asked to complete
the forms on disk and return them, physically or electronically, to a central
location. This approach reduces paper flow and makes handling, storing, and
security easier to manage than is possible with paper records. Unfortunately,
SP&M information that is inventoried in this manner will usually be troublesome
to cross-reference.
Tailored SP&M software is becoming more common. Much of it is now
Web-based or suitable for Web applications. Succession planning and management
coordinators should review several such packages before purchasing
one. The chief advantage of this software is that it is designed specifically for
SP&M. Indeed, it can give decision-makers good ideas about desirable features
to change, add to, or subtract from the SP&M program. Handling, storing,
cross-referencing, and maintaining security over much information is greatly
simplified. While software prices were relatively high even a few years ago,
they are now affordable to most organizations employing fifty or more people.
The only major disadvantage of this software is that it can present temptations
to modify organization needs to satisfy software demands. In other
words, software may not provide sufficient flexibility to tailor SP&M forms and
procedures to meet the unique needs of one organization. That can be a major
drawback. For this reason, SP&M software should be carefully reviewed, in
cooperation with the vendor, prior to purchase. Of course, it may be possible
for the vendor to modify the software to meet organizational needs at a modest
cost.
Succession planning and management software may also be integrated
with other personnel systems. In this case—and some large organizations attempt
to keep all data in one place, usually in a mainframe system, in an effort
to economize the problems inherent in multiple-source data entry and manipulation—SP&M
information is included with payroll, training, and other records.
Unfortunately, such software is usually of limited value for SP&M
applications. To be tailored to a large organization’s uses, such software may
have to undergo lengthy and large-scale programming projects. A typical—and
major—problem with such mainframe HRIS programs is that they provide insufficient
storage space for detailed, individualized recordkeeping tailored to
unique organizational procedures. When that is the case, it may be easier to
use a personal-computer-based system—or else mount a massive, expensive,
and probably quickly dated programming effort to modify a mainframe program.

290 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Evaluating the Program
An eighth and final important component of any effective SP&M program is
some means by which to evaluate the SP&M program and each of its components.
This ensures that continuous program improvement can be made. At
this writing, however, no online software currently exists that is specifically
tailored to evaluating SP&M programs. Thus SP&M coordinators must prepare
their own online and high-tech approaches if they wish to use them for evaluating
their programs.
Of course, it should be relatively simple to prepare online questionnaires
or other surveys to gather information about the relative value of SP&M programs.
Typical evaluation issues that should be addressed will be discussed in
the next chapter. Using online methods, however, may increase the speed and
ease of response and facilitate data analysis.
Other Applications
There are other online and high-tech applications for SP&M. For instance, you
can use software to prepare replacement charts. Best known, and perhaps
least expensive, for doing that is probably OrgPlus (found at the time this book
goes to press at www.gneil.com/item.html?s-5041&i-601&pos-6&sessionid-S9
nac7q435).
Software can also be purchased to facilitate preparation of forms for succession
planning (such as Formtool, described at www.cdromshop.com/
cdshop/desc/p.730526347135.html) or online training support to build competencies.
Many so-called e-learning sites exist on the Web, and they can be
tied to the competencies that individuals need to build to qualify for advancement
opportunities.
What Specialized Competencies Do Succession Planning
and Management Coordinators Need to Use These
Applications?
The specialized competencies required by SP&M program coordinators to use
online and high-tech applications in their programs will, of course, vary by the
medium or media that they use and their applications. It is not advisable to try
to be all things to all people, so it is best to target specific applications of
potential value to the organization and spend only the time necessary to master
those.
Succession planning and management coordinators can apply online and
high-tech methods in essentially three ways. First, they can try to learn it on
their own. The competency requirements to do that can be the most daunting.
It means mastery of the subject matter—such as, for instance, performance
appraisal—and the technical issues associated with the application. As a simple

Using Technology to Support Succession Planning and Management Programs
291
example, putting the company’s performance appraisal system on the Web
might mean that technical knowledge is required of HTML and JAVA languages.
Likewise, preparing Web-based training may require knowledge of the subject
matter, instructional design, and the programming languages necessary to
place it on the Web.
Second, contractual assistance could be hired to provide help with all or
part of the project. That would permit the SP&M coordinator to concentrate
on the subject matter and on managing the project. Hence, necessary competencies
would focus around the subject area and project management. Technical
issues would be handled by a contractor.
Third, the SP&M coordinator could create a team whose members collectively
possess the competencies necessary to perform the work. In this case,
the coordinator would at least require subject matter competence, project
management competence, and facilitation competence to help team members
work together. The coordinator may be able to choose team members from
within the organization who possess the requisite technical knowledge of the
media or medium.
Some competencies are shared no matter which of the three approaches
is chosen. First, patience is an essential competency to work with any online
or high-tech application. (It is never as easy as it appears to be.) Second,
knowledge of the organization’s corporate culture and politics is also important.
The SP&M coordinator must understand how decisions are made in the
organization and be able to work through that process to achieve the desired
results. Third and finally, the SP&M coordinator must be able to excite enthusiasm
among other people for the project. Without these competencies, it will
be difficult to make any application successful.
Summary
As this chapter has pointed out, online and high-tech approaches are having
an important impact on succession planning and management practices. The
chapter focused attention on four key questions: (1) How are online and hightech
methods defined? (2) In what areas of succession planning and management
can online and high-tech methods be applied? (3) How are online and
high-tech applications used? and (4) What specialized competencies are required
by succession planning and management coordinators to use these
applications?
The next chapter focuses on the important issue of evaluating succession
planning and management programs. As decision-makers devote more time
and other resources to succession issues, they naturally wonder if their efforts
are paying off. For that reason, evaluation is becoming more important in succession
planning and management.

C H A P T E R 1 3
EVALUATING SUCCESSION
PLANNING AND
MANAGEMENT PROGRAMS
After a succession planning and management (SP&M) program has been implemented,
top managers will eventually ask, ‘‘Is this effort worth what it
costs? How well is it working? Is it meeting the organization’s needs?’’ Simple
answers to these questions will prove to be elusive because an SP&M program
will affect many people, and will usually have to satisfy conflicting goals, interests,
and priorities. But the questions do underscore the need to establish
some way to evaluate the program. This chapter, then, will explore three simple
questions: (1) What is evaluation? (2) What should be evaluated in SP&M?
and (3) How should an SP&M program be evaluated?
What Is Evaluation?
Evaluation means placing value or determining worth. 1 It is a process of determining
how much value is being added to an activity by a program, and it is
through evaluation that the need for program improvements is identified and
such improvements are eventually made. Evaluation is typically carried out by
an evaluator or team of evaluators against a backdrop of client expectations
about the program and the need for information on which to make sound
decisions.
Interest in Evaluation
The evaluation of human resource programs has been a popular topic of numerous
books, articles, and professional presentations. 2 Treatments of it have
tended to focus on such bottom-line issues as cost/benefit analysis and return
on investment, 3 which should not be surprising since, in view of the perception
of HR practitioners, these issues are of chief interest to top managers.
Training has figured most prominently in this literature, probably because it
292

Evaluating Succession Planning and Management Programs
293
continues to enjoy the dubious reputation of being the first HR program to be
slashed when an organization falls on hard times.
On the other hand, writers on evaluation have tended to pay far less attention
to SP&M than to training. One reason could be that systematic SP&M is
less common in organizations than training is. A second reason could be that
evaluations of SP&M are informally made on a case-by-case basis whenever a
vacancy occurs in a key position: if a successor is ‘‘ready, willing, and able’’
when needed, the SP&M program is given the credit; otherwise, it is blamed.
While the value of SP&M should (of course) be judged on more than that basis
alone, the reality is often far different.
Key Questions Governing Evaluation
To be performed effectively, evaluation for SP&M should focus on several key
questions:
1. Who will use the results?
2. How will the results be used?
3. What do the program’s clients expect from it?
4. Who is carrying out the evaluation?
The first question seeks to identify the audience. The second question seeks
to clarify what decisions will be made based on evaluation results. The third
question grounds evaluation in client expectations and program objectives.
Finally, the fourth question provides clues about appropriate evaluation techniques
based on the expertise of the chosen evaluator(s).
What Should Be Evaluated?
Some years ago, Donald Kirkpatrick developed a four-level hierarchy of training
evaluation that may be usefully modified to help conceptualize what
should be evaluated in SP&M. 4
Kirkpatrick’s Hierarchy of Training Evaluation
The four levels of Kirkpatrick’s training evaluation hierarchy are reaction,
learning, behavior, and organizational outcomes or results. Reaction forms
the base of the hierarchy and is easiest to measure. It examines customer satisfaction—that
is, ‘‘How much did participants like what they learned?’’ Learning,
the second level on the hierarchy, has to do with immediate change. In
other words, ‘‘How well did participants master the information or skills they
were supposed to learn in training?’’ The third level of the hierarchy, behavior,

294 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
has to do with on-the-job application. ‘‘How much change occurred on the
job as a result of learner participation in training?’’ The highest level of Kirkpatrick’s
hierarchy, the fourth and final one, is organizational outcomes, or results.
It is also the most difficult to measure. ‘‘How much influence did the
results or effects of training have on the organization?’’
Modifying Kirkpatrick’s Hierarchy
Use Kirkpatrick’s Hierarchy of Training Evaluation to provide a conceptual
basis for evaluating an SP&M program. (Examine the Hierarchy of Succession
Planning and Management Evaluation depicted in Exhibit 13-1.)
Make the first level customer satisfaction, which corresponds to Kirkpatrick’s
reaction level. Pose the following questions:
▲ How satisfied with the SP&M program are its chief customers?
▲ How satisfied are its customers with each program component—such as
job descriptions, competency models, performance appraisal processes,
individual potential assessment processes, individual development
forms, and individual development activities?
▲ How well does SP&M match up to individual career plans? How do
employees perceive SP&M?
Make the second level program progress, which is meant to correspond to
Kirkpatrick’s learning level. Pose the following questions:
▲ How well is each part of the SP&M program working compared to stated
program objectives?
▲ How well are individuals progressing through their developmental experiences
in preparation for future advancement into key positions?
Make the third level effective placements, which is meant to correspond to
Kirkpatrick’s behavior level. Pose these questions:
▲ What percentage of vacancies in key positions is the organization able
to fill internally?
▲ How quickly is the organization able to fill vacancies in key positions?
▲ What percentage of vacancies in key positions is the organization able
to fill successfully (that is, without avoidable turnover in the first two
years in the position)?
▲ How quickly are internal replacements for key positions able to perform
at the level required for the organization?

Evaluating Succession Planning and Management Programs
295
Exhibit 13-1. The Hierarchy of Succession Planning and Management
Evaluation
Organization Results
Effective Placements
Program Progress
Customer Satisfaction
How is succession planning
contributing to documentable and
measurable organization results?
What organizational successes and
failures, if any, can be attributed
solely to succession planning?
What percentages of vacancies in
key positions is the organization able
to fill internally?
How quickly is the organization able
to fill vacancies in key positions?
What percentage of vacancies in key
positions is the organization able to
fill successfully (without avoidable
turnover in the first two years in the
position)?
How quickly are internal
replacements for key positions able
to perform at the level required for
the organization?
What savings, if any, can be
demonstrated from not filling key
positions for which alternative, and
more innovative, approaches were
used to maintain equivalent results?
How well is each part of the
succession planning program
working compared to its stated
objectives?
How well are individuals progressing
through their developmental
experiences in preparation for future
advancement into key positions?
How satisfied with the succession
planning program are its chief
customers?
How satisfied are targeted clients
with each program component?
How well does succession planning
match up to individual career plans?

Evaluating Succession Planning and Management Programs
296
▲ What savings, if any, can be demonstrated from not filling key positions
for which alternative, and more innovative, approaches were used to
achieve results?
Make the fourth level organizational results, which is meant to correspond
to Kirkpatrick’s outcomes or results. Direct attention to the impact of
SP&M on the organization’s ability to compete effectively, which is (admittedly)
difficult to do. Consider the following questions:
▲ How is SP&M contributing, if at all, to documentable organizational results?
▲ What successes or failures in organizational strategic plans, if any, can
be attributed to SP&M?
Use the guidelines in Exhibit 13-2 and the worksheet in Exhibit 13-3 to consider
ways to evaluate SP&M in an organization on each level of the hierarchy.
Of course, it is possible to evaluate an SP&M program on all four levels, and
when that is done, a scorecard for SP&M is created.
How Should Evaluation Be Conducted?
Evaluation may be conducted anecdotally, periodically, or programmatically.
Anecdotal Evaluation
Anecdotal evaluation is akin to using testimonials in evaluating training. 5 It
examines the operation of the SP&M program on a case-by-case basis. As vacancies
occur in key positions, someone—often the SP&M coordinator—documents
in incident reports how they are filled. (See Exhibit 13-4 for an example
of an incident report.) The incident reports are eventually brought to the organization’s
SP&M committee for review and discussion. They provide a solid
foundation for troubleshooting problems in SP&M that the organization is
confronting. They can then be used as a basis for planning to handle similar
problems in the future.
Anecdotal evaluation dramatizes especially good and bad practices. This
draws attention to them and provides an impetus for change, a chief advantage
of the anecdotal approach. On the other hand, anecdotal evaluation suffers
from a lack of research rigor. It is not necessarily representative of typical
SP&M practices in the organization. (Indeed, it focuses on so-called special
cases, horror stories, and war stories.) It may thus draw attention to unique,
even minor, problems with SP&M in the organization.
(text continues on page 301)

Exhibit 13-2. Guidelines for Evaluating the Succession Planning and Management Program
Type/Level Purpose Strengths Weaknesses
Customer
Satisfaction
Program
Progress
Effective
Placements
Organizational
Results
To measure client feelings
about the program and its
results.
To measure results of each
component of the succession
planning program.
To measure the results of the
succession decisions made.
To measure impact of the
succession planning program
on the organization.
Easy to measure.
Provides immediate feedback
on program activities
and components.
Provides objective data on
the effectiveness of the
succession planning program.
Provides objective data on
impact to the job situation.
Provides objective data for
cost-benefit analysis and
organizational support.
Subjective.
Provides no objective
measurement of program
results.
Requires skill in program
evaluation.
Provides no measurement
of skills of benefit to the
organization.
Requires first-rate
employee performance
appraisal system.
Requires high level of evaluation
design skills; requires
collection of data
over a period of time.
Requires knowledge of the
organization’s strategy
and goals.
(continues)

Exhibit 13-2. (continued)
Type/Level Examples Guidelines for Development
Customer
Satisfaction
Program
Progress
Effective
Placements
Organizational
Results
‘‘Happiness reports.’’
Informal interviews with
‘‘clients’’ at all levels.
Group discussion in
succession planning
meetings.
Examine individual movements
through the organization.
Performance checklists.
Performance appraisals.
Critical incident analysis.
Design a survey form that can be easily tabulated.
Ask questions to provide information about what you
need to know: attitudes about each component of the
succession planning program.
Allow for anonymity and allow the respondents the
opportunity to provide additional comments.
Design an instrument that will provide quantitative
data.
Include ‘‘pre’’ and ‘‘post’’ level of skill/knowledge in
design.
Tie evaluation items directly to program objectives.
Base measurement instrument on systematic analysis
Organizational analysis.
Speed of replacement.
Cost of replacements.
Cost of nonreplacements.
of key positions.
Consider the use of a variety of persons to conduct
the evaluation.
Involve all necessary levels of the organization.
Gain commitment to allow access to organization indices
and records.
Use organization business plans and mission statements
to compare organizational needs and program
results.

Evaluating Succession Planning and Management Programs
299
Exhibit 13-3. A Worksheet for Identifying Appropriate Ways to Evaluate
Succession Planning and Management in an Organization
Directions: Use this worksheet to help you identify appropriate ways to evaluate the
SP&M program in your organization.
In column 1 below, indicate the various stakeholder groups (such as top managers,
key position incumbents, line managers, and the SP&M coordinator) who will be
primarily interested in evaluation results on SP&M in your organization. Then, in
column 2, indicate what levels of evaluation—customer satisfaction, program progress,
effective placements, and organizational results—will probably be of prime
interest to each stakeholder group. Then, in column 3, indicate how evaluation of
SP&M may be carried out in your organization.
Column 1 Column 2 Column 3
Stakeholder Groups What Levels of Eval- How Should Evaluafor
Evaluation uation Will Probably tion of the SP&M
Be of Prime Interest
Program Be Carried
to Each Group?
Out in Your Organization?

300 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 13-4. A Sample ‘‘Incident Report’’ for Succession Planning
and Management
Directions: The purpose of this ‘‘incident report’’ is to track successor/replacement
experiences in your organization.
Answer the questions appearing in the spaces below. Be as truthful as possible
because the collective results of many incident reports will be used to identify program
improvement initiatives for the succession planning program.
Fill out this report for each position filled from within. (This report should be completed
in addition to any personnel requisitions/justification forms that you are to
complete.) Submit the completed form to (name) at(organization address) within 3
weeks after filling the vacancy.
Name of Departing Employee
Department
Time in Position
Job Title
Reason for Leaving (if known)
Name of Replacing Employee
Department
Work Unit/Team
Job Title
Time in Position
Today’s Date
1. Describe how this position is being replaced (internally/externally).
2. Was there an identifiable ‘‘successor’’ who had been prepared to assume this
position previously? If so, briefly explain who and how the individual was being
prepared; if not, briefly explain reasons for not preparing a successor.
3. Who was selected for the position, and why was he/she selected?
4. If an individual other than an identifiable successor was chosen for the position,
explain why.
Approval
Management Employee
(Signature)
Title

301 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Periodic Evaluation
Periodic evaluation examines components of SP&M at different times, focusing
attention on program operations at present or in the recent past. Rather than
evaluate critical incidents (as anecdotal evaluation does) or all program components
(as programmatic evaluation does), periodic evaluation examines isolated
program components. For instance, the SP&M coordinator may direct
attention to:
▲ The Program Mission Statement
▲ Program Objectives, Policy, and Philosophy
▲ Methods of Determining Work Requirements for Key Positions
▲ Employee Performance Appraisal
▲ Employee Potential Assessment
▲ Individual Development Planning
▲ Individual Development Activities
Periodic evaluation may be conducted during regular SP&M meetings and/
or in SP&M committee meetings. Alternatively, the organization’s decisionmakers
may wish to establish a task force, create a subcommittee of the SP&M
committee, or even involve a committee of the board of directors in this evaluation
process.
A chief advantage of periodic evaluation is that it provides occasional, formal
monitoring of the SP&M program. That process can build involvement,
and thus ownership, of key stakeholders while simultaneously surfacing important
problems in the operation of the SP&M program. A chief disadvantage
of periodic evaluation is that it makes the improvement of SP&M an incremental
rather than a continuous effort. Problems may be left to fester for too long
before they are targeted for investigation.
Programmatic Evaluation
Programmatic evaluation examines the SP&M program comprehensively
against its stated mission, objectives, and activities. It is an in-depth program
review and resembles the human resources audit that may be conducted of all
HR activities. 6
Programmatic evaluation is usually carried out by a formally appointed
committee or by an external consultant. The SP&M coordinator is usually a
member of a committee. Representatives of key line management areas—and
the CEO or members of the corporate board of directors—may also be members.
Examine the steps in Exhibit 13-5 and the checklist in Exhibit 13-6 as starting
points for conducting a program evaluation of SP&M in an organization.
(text continues on page 307)

302 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 13-5. Steps for Completing a Program Evaluation of a Succession
Planning and Management Program
Step 1 Assemble a group of 5–8 individuals who
Assemble a committee to have their own roles to play in the succession
conduct the program evalconsist
of the CEO, succession planning co-
planning program (ideally the group should
uation.
ordinator, VP of HR, and two or more key operating
managers).
Step 2 Call a meeting, providing briefing materials
Brief committee members to committee members beforehand.
on the need for evaluating Explain the value of evaluating the succession
the succession planning
planning program.
program and the steps to Provide benchmarking information from
be followed in the evalua- other firms, if available.
tion effort.
Provide information from ‘‘incident reports’’
and other indicators of the program’s progress.
Agree on evaluation objectives, approaches,
and steps.
Step 3 Conduct research.
Conduct background research
on the relative effectiveness
of the
succession planning program.
Step 4 Analyze results.
Analyze results, make
Prepare recommendations for program imrecommendations
for
provements.
program improvements,
Write report and prepare oral presentation.
and document evaluation
results.
Step 5 Circulate written report.
Communicate results.
Present oral report/briefing to those responsible
for the succession planning program.

Evaluating Succession Planning and Management Programs
303
Step 6 Ask those with responsibility for succession
Identify specific actions for planning, such as key operating managers,
improvement.
to establish improvement objectives.
Step 7 Take continuing action for improvement
Take continuing action for through training, briefings, and other means.
program improvement.

304 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 13-6. A Checksheet for Conducting a Program Evaluation for the
Succession Planning and Management Program
Directions: Use this checksheet as a starting point for deciding what to evaluate
in your organization’s succession planning program. Ask members of a program
evaluation committee to complete the following checksheet, compare notes, and
then use the results as the basis for recommending improvements to the succession
planning program. Add, delete, or modify characteristics in the left column as appropriate.
Characteristics
of Effective
Programs
Does your
organization’s
succession planning
program
have this
characteristic?
How important do you
believe this characteristic
to be for an effective
succession planning
program?
For the succession Not Very
planning program, YES NO Important Important
has your organization: () () 1 2 3 4 5
1. Tied the succession plan- ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
ning program to organizational
strategic plans?
2. Tied the succession plan- ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
ning program to individual
career plans?
3. Tied the succession plan- ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
ning program to training
programs?
4. Prepared a written pro- ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
gram purpose statement?
5. Prepared written program ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
goals to indicate what results
the succession planning
program should
achieve?
6. Established measurable ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
objectives for program operation
(such as number of
positions replaced per
year)?
7. Identified what groups are ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
to be served by the program,
in priority order?

Evaluating Succession Planning and Management Programs
305
8. Established a written policy ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
statement to guide the
program?
9. Articulated a written phi- ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
losophy about the program?
10. Established a program ac- ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
tion plan?
11. Established a schedule of ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
program events based on
the action plan?
12. Fixed responsibility for or- ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
ganizational oversight of
the program?
13. Fixed responsibility of each ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
participant in the program?
14. Established incentives/re- ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
wards for identified successors
in the succession
planning program?
15. Established incentives/re- ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
wards for managers with
identified successors?
16. Developed a means to ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
budget for a succession
planning program?
17. Devised a means to keep ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
records for individuals who
are designated as successors?
18. Created workshops to ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
train management employees
about the succession
planning program?
19. Created workshops to ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
train individuals about career
planning?
20. Established a means to ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
clarify present position responsibilities?
(continues)

306 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 13-6. (continued)
Characteristics
of Effective
Programs
Does your
organization’s
succession planning
program
have this
characteristic?
How important do you
believe this characteristic
to be for an effective
succession planning
program?
For the succession Not Very
planning program, YES NO Important Important
has your organization: () () 1 2 3 4 5
21. Established a means to
clarify future position responsibilities?
( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
22. Established a means to
appraise individual performance?
( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
23. Established a means to
compare individual skills
to the requirements of a
future position (potential
assessment)? ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
24. Established a way to review
organizational talent
at least annually? ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
25. Established a way to forecast
future talent needs? ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
26. Established a way to plan
for meeting succession
planning needs through
individual development
plans? ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
27. Established a means to
track development activities
to prepare successors
for eventual advancement? ( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5
28. Established a means to
evaluate the results of the
succession planning program?
( ) ( ) 1 2 3 4 5

Evaluating Succession Planning and Management Programs
307
(Compare Exhibit 13-6 to the survey responses appearing in Exhibit 2-1 as a
means of evaluating your organization’s SP&M program against others.)
Summary
This chapter addressed three simple questions: (1) What is evaluation? (2)
What should be evaluated in succession planning and management? and (3)
How should a succession planning and management program be evaluated?
Evaluation was defined as the process of placing value or determining worth.
It is through evaluation that the need for improvements is identified and such
improvements are eventually made to the succession planning and management
program. Evaluation should focus on several key questions: (1) Who will
use the results? (2) How will the results be used? (3) What do the program’s
clients expect from it? and (4) Who is carrying out the evaluation?
The evaluation of succession planning and management was focused on
four levels, comparable to those devised by Donald Kirkpatrick to describe
training evaluation. Those four levels are customer satisfaction, program progress,
effective placements, and organizational results. One conducts evaluation
anecdotally, periodically, or programmatically. Anecdotal evaluation is akin to
using testimonials in evaluating training. Periodic evaluation examines isolated
components of the succession planning and management program at different
times, focusing attention on program operations at present or in the recent
past. Programmatic evaluation examines the succession planning and management
program comprehensively against its stated mission, objectives, and activities.

C H A P T E R 1 4
THE FUTURE OF SUCCESSION
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
No organization is immune to changing external environmental conditions.
However, what external conditions will affect an organization varies, depending
on such factors as the organization’s industry, size, and relative market
dominance. Moreover, how those conditions affect an organization depends
on the ways in which its leaders and workers choose to address them. These
principles hold as true for succession planning and management (SP&M) programs
as for strategic planning.
Examining trends is a popular HR activity. Much has been written in recent
years about trends affecting HR generally, 1 functional areas within HR specifically,
2 and SP&M efforts. 3 A cursory glance at the writing in the field yields
many topics concerning outsourcing HR, cutting HR (and particularly benefits)
costs, transforming HR into a strategic partner, building bench strength and
talent pools, enhancing work and life balance, maintaining employee security
in the wake of increasing violence in the workplace and threats of terrorism
outside the workplace, 4 and using technology to leverage HR productivity.
In this final chapter, I gaze into the crystal ball and offer predictions for the
future of SP&M that are likely to arise from changing external environmental
conditions. While some predictions remain unchanged from the last edition
of this book, I add some additional ones. SP&M needs will:
▲ Prompt efforts by decision-makers to find a flexible range of strategies
to address organizational talent needs.
▲ Lead to integrated retention policies and procedures that seek the early
identification of high-potential talent, efforts to retain that talent, and
efforts to retain older high-potential workers.
▲ Have a global impact.
▲ Be influenced increasingly by real-time technological innovations.
▲ Become an issue in government agencies, academic institutions, and
nonprofit organizations in a way never before seen. Businesses will not
be the only organizations interested in succession issues.
308

The Future of Succession Planning and Management
309
▲ Lead to increasing organizational openness about possible successors.
▲ Increasingly seek to integrate effective succession issues with careerdevelopment
issues.
▲ Be heavily influenced by concerns about work/family balance and spirituality
issues.
▲ Focus increasingly on real-time talent-development efforts as well as
strategic efforts, which center on the role of managers in daily work
with their reports.
▲ Center as much on ethical and value-oriented issues as on competencybased
issues.
▲ Become more fully integrated with selection decisions.
▲ Focus on leveraging talent as well as developing it.
▲ Include alternatives to one-hire-at-a-time approaches, such as mergers,
acquisitions, or takeovers for the purpose of rapid and broad-based talent
acquisition.
▲ Become closely linked to risk management and concerns about security.
▲ Become associated with more than management succession.
Before you read about these predictions, use the worksheet in Exhibit 14-1 to
structure your thinking (and that of decision-makers in your organization).
The Fifteen Predictions
Prediction 1: Decision-Makers Will Seek Flexible Strategies to Address Future
Organizational Talent Needs
In the future, decision-makers will not view succession issues as one problem
requiring only one solution. Instead, they will seek a range of strategies to
address future organizational talent needs that will include, but will go beyond,
SP&M programs. In other words, succession problems will be solved
using many possible solutions. The choice of a solution will be made on a caseby-case
basis, but with a strategic view that seeks an integration of approaches.
Think about it for a minute. In how many ways can an organization’s talent
needs be met through approaches other than an SP&M program that is designed
to build in-house bench strength over time? Consider at least fifteen
possible alternative approaches. Each approach should be reviewed at the time
decision-makers plan for succession needs. Decision-makers should begin by
clarifying what talent they require, why their organization has that need, and
how the need might be met.
The first alternative approach to SP&M is to hire from the outside. In fact,
this is probably the most obvious way to meet a talent need other than through
internal promotion or development. It is sometimes chosen before internal
(text continues on page 312)

Exhibit 14-1. A Worksheet to Structure Your Thinking About Predictions for Succession Planning and
Management in the Future
Directions: Use this worksheet to structure your thinking about possible predictions that may influence SP&M programs in
the future. For each prediction listed in Column 1 below, indicate in Column 2 whether you believe that the prediction is
true. Then describe under Column 3 what you believe the prediction means in your organization and under Column 4 how
much impact that prediction will have in your organization. Finally, under Column 5, offer suggestions about what your
organization should do about the prediction. There are no ‘‘right’’ or ‘‘wrong’’ approaches to addressing these predictions.
Instead, use this worksheet to do some brainstorming about predictions affecting SP&M in your organization in the future.
Add paper if necessary.
Column 1
What is the prediction?
Succession planning and
management will:
1 Prompt efforts by decisionmakers
to find a flexible range
of strategies to address organizational
talent needs.
2 Lead to integrated retention
policies and procedures that
seek the early identification of
high-potential talent, efforts to
retain that talent, and efforts to
retain older high-potential
workers.
Column 2
Do you
believe the
prediction
is true?
Yes
□
□
No
□
□
Column 3
What does the
prediction
mean in your
organization?
Column 4
How much impact
will that prediction
have in your
organization?
Column 5
What actions should
your organization
take to address the
prediction?

3 Have a global impact. □ □
4 Be influenced increasingly by
real-time technological innovations.
5 Become an issue in government
agencies, academic institutions,
and nonprofit organizations in a
way never before seen. Businesses
will not be the only organizations
interested in
succession issues.
6 Lead to increasing organizational
openness about possible
successors.
7 Increasingly seek to integrate
effective succession issues with
career development issues.
8 Be heavily influenced by concerns
about work/family balance
and spirituality issues.
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□

312 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
replacements are considered. A key advantage of this approach is that it prevents
inbreeding, since newcomers often bring with them fresh solutions to
old organizational problems. A key disadvantage of this approach is that the
cycle time required to fill a vacancy can be agonizingly long—and there is no
guarantee that someone chosen from outside the organization will successfully
adapt to its unique corporate culture.
A second approach is to reorganize. Take just one example: If the vice
president of human resources retires, dies, or leaves the organization, the CEO
may choose to meet the need by assigning the HR function to another manager.
That is just one example of how to solve a talent need by reorganizing.
The same approach can be used to meet talent needs in other key positions.
Of course, this approach only works if someone qualified is available—and has
sufficient interest, motivation, and ability to assume more responsibility.
A third approach is to outsource the work. If this approach is chosen, the
challenge is to find a suitable outsourcing partner. That cannot always be
done, but it is one option. A disadvantage is that this approach should be used
only with activities not directly related to the organization’s core competence—the
key strategic strength that sets an organization apart from competitors.
It is, after all, unwise to outsource the essence of what makes an
organization competitive, since that path can lead to bankruptcy or to a takeover.
A fourth approach is to insource the work. If this approach is used, decision-makers
seek to find synergy between two functions. Of course, this
assumes that some excess capacity—that is, people or resources—exists somewhere
in the organization. Suppose, for instance, that a vacancy for a key position
exists in one industrial plant. That need could be met by insourcing the
work to another plant operated by the same company. An external partner is
not sought. Instead, the function is performed internally. This approach differs
from reorganization because the insourcing partner does not permanently assume
the duties of the new function but performs them only temporarily.
A fifth approach is to hire, on contract, a temporary replacement for a key
position.. Some firms specialize in supplying temporary help, even for positions
such as CEO, with which temps have not been historically associated.
A sixth approach is to bring in a consultant to help. While similar to using
a temp, this approach differs in that a consultant is usually not on site every
day to perform the work, as temps generally are. The consultant, in short,
performs the work on a project-to-project basis and may even telecommute.
This can reduce costs but may also diminish the impact of the key position on
the organization.
A seventh approach is to transfer someone from another part of the organization,
temporarily or permanently, to meet a succession need. Of course, it is
usually assumed that an individual who is transferred meets at least the basic
entry-level requirements for the job. Internal transfers, however, have the disadvantage
of touching off a domino effect (sometimes called a musical chairs
effect), in which the movement of one person can prompt movements by many
others.

The Future of Succession Planning and Management
313
An eighth approach is to acquire another organization that possesses the
needed talent. In the past, mergers, acquisitions, purchases, and takeovers
were sought to realize savings from economies of scale, a desire for higher
executive salaries resulting from correlations between senior executive pay
and organizational size, and the pursuit of improved integration with such key
groups as suppliers, distributors, and even competitors. In the future, however,
CEOs will regard mergers, acquisitions, purchases, and takeovers as one
means to address talent shortages. 5 (That is an issue treated at greater length
below.) Organizations with well-known core competencies will become acquisition
targets for other firms that are cash rich but are experiencing talent
shortages. Instead of struggling to fill one vacancy at a time, organizations will
look for other firms to absorb outright to achieve a massive infusion of new
talent.
The ninth approach is to reduce or eliminate the work completely. In other
words, the work performed by an otherwise critically important function or
position could be reduced or eliminated to solve a succession problem. As one
way to do that, the CEO can choose to spin off or sell the business or function.
A tenth approach is to delegate the work up to a high potential in the
organization. This is, of course, a form of reorganization. But instead of giving
responsibility to another manager when the organization experiences a loss of
talent, the work is absorbed by the immediate organizational superior.
An eleventh approach is to delegate the work down. As with the tenth
approach, it is a form of reorganization. The work of a high-potential employee
is absorbed by one or more of his or her subordinates, without promotion. A
variation of this approach is to form a team and delegate the work to that
group.
A twelfth approach is to form a strategic alliance with another organization
to meet succession needs. This usually means arranging a short-term partnership.
While strategic alliances have often been formed in product manufacturing,
they could also be formed to meet succession needs. However, this
approach is potentially useful on a short-term basis only, since few organizations
want to lose high-potential talent forever.
A thirteenth approach is to trade needed talent, temporarily or permanently,
with other organizations. Similar to a strategic alliance, this approach
tends to be even shorter term. Some organizations provide ‘‘loaned executives,’’
for instance, to build the competencies of their high potentials. However,
few organizations want to lose their high potentials for an extended time.
A fourteenth approach is to recruit globally rather than domestically, targeting
individuals with needed talent outside the United States. Multinational
corporations especially may be able to trade talent from one part of the world
to another and thereby treat succession issues as moves on a global chessboard.
A fifteenth approach is to hire back managers or other talent. As the U.S.
population ages, this approach is already being used by many organizations,
such as is the case of Deloitte’s Senior Leaders Program, launched to preserve

The Future of Succession Planning and Management
314
the knowledge and experience of its talent after the traditional retirement
age. 6 Use the worksheet in Exhibit 14-2 to structure your thinking about ways to
meet succession needs based on the approaches described above. Whenever
a talent need arises in your organization, use the worksheet to contemplate
possibilities for meeting that need. Also use the worksheet to integrate the
strategies so that your organization is not dependent on only one strategy.
Prediction 2: Decision-Makers Will Seek Integrated Retention Policies and Procedures
Employers in the United States may face a growing problem in finding and
keeping talent. As this book goes to press, employment levels are at record
lows. While that means that talent is plentiful at the moment, employers can
no longer safely assume that the future will be like the present. It is likely
they will be competing with many other employers, and this competition is
especially intense for high-potential workers with proven track records.
To address this problem, employers should formulate and implement policies
and procedures to identify the high-potential talent earlier and to retain
that talent longer. Employers will thus need to take such steps as these:
▲ Develop early tracking systems to find new hires having special promise.
That can be done with potential assessments performed within the first
few months of employment.
▲ Track the reasons for ‘‘quits’’ generally and the reasons for the departure
of high-potential talent specifically. That may require revamped exit
interviews to capture information about why people (and especially
high potentials) leave, where they go, and what they believe could have
prompted them to stay. Exit interview systems beg to be reinvented.
▲ Use attitude surveys on a continuing basis to predict turnover and measure
job satisfaction. That can be done simply by asking workers on a
survey whether they plan to quit within the next year and then supplying
questions to uncover chief sources of dissatisfaction. The results
can be cross-tabulated, and provide useful information for improving
retention and making accurate predictions of turnover.
▲ Track voluntary turnover and critical turnover by department and examine
increases in each department for trends or patterns. Then act to
address problems in these hot spots.
▲ Provide incentives for people to remain with the organization. (Do not
assume that all incentives are financial.) Find out what people need to
encourage them to remain with the employer.
By taking these and similar actions, employers can devise an integrated retention
strategy to reduce turnover and thereby improve retention.
(text continues on page 318)

Exhibit 14-2. A Worksheet to Structure Your Thinking About Alternative Approaches to Meeting Succession
Needs
Directions: Use this worksheet to structure your thinking about alternative approaches to meeting succession needs. First,
describe the succession need in the space below and indicate how important it is to the organization, why it is important,
and when action needs to be taken to meet the need. Then, rate possible alternatives to internal succession. Then rate each
alternative approach, using the following scale:
1 Not at All Effective
2 It May Be Somewhat Useful
3 It Will Be Useful
4 It Will Be Very Useful
What is the succession need? (Describe the need. Then answer these questions: (1) How important is this succession need
to the organization? (2) Why is it important? and (3) When does action need to be taken to meet the need?)
Approach
How well can the succession
need be met by:
Not at All
Effective
Rating of the Approach
It May Be
Somewhat
Useful
It Will Be
Useful
It Will Be
Very Useful
1 Hiring from the outside? 1 2 3 4
2 Reorganizing? 1 2 3 4
3 Outsourcing the work? 1 2 3 4
4 Insourcing the work? 1 2 3 4
5 Hiring a temporary replacement
on contract?
1 2 3 4
Notes
(continues)

Exhibit 14-2. (continued)
Approach
How well can the succession
need be met by:
6 Bringing in a consultant to
help?
7 Transferring someone from
another part of the organization,
temporarily or permanently,
to meet the succession
need?
8 Acquiring another organization
that possesses the
needed talent?
9 Reducing or eliminating the
work completely?
10 Delegating the work up in the
organization?
11 Delegating the work down in
the organization?
12 Forming a strategic alliance
with another organization to
meet the need?
Not at All
Effective
Rating of the Approach
It May Be
Somewhat
Useful
It Will Be
Useful
It Will Be
Very Useful
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
Notes

13 Trading needed talent, temporarily
or permanently, with
other organizations?
14 Recruiting globally rather
than domestically, targeting
individuals with needed talent
outside the borders of the
United States?
15 Hiring back needed managers
or other talent after they
have departed from the organization?
16 What other alternative approaches
can you think of,
and how effective are they?
(List them below.)
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4
1 2 3 4

318 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Prediction 3: Succession Planning and Management Issues Will Have a Global Impact
Succession issues have emerged as front-burner topics in the United States
because of the well-known demographic trends for retirement in future years.
(See Exhibit 14-3 for the projected U.S. population breakdown in the year
2025.) Indeed, the number of people between the ages of fifty-five and sixtyfour
is expected to increase by 54 percent between 1996 and 2006. 7 At the
same time, there will be a decrease of 8.8 percent in the number of people
expected to enter the workforce in the traditional entry-level ages of twentyfive
to thirty-four. 8
What is not so well known is that trends elsewhere in the world also point
toward growing numbers of older people as a greater proportion of the population.
For instance, consider Exhibits 14-4, 14-5, and 14-6. These exhibits depict
the projected populations in China, the United Kingdom, and France,
respectively, in the year 2025. Note the numbers of people in the traditional
postretirement categories in each nation. Government attempts to control
overpopulation (such as the ‘‘one child per couple’’ policy in China) and preferences
for smaller families elsewhere point toward growth in the number of
elder citizens and fewer young people to take their place. As there are more
elderly people living longer in the world, succession issues will emerge as a
global concern.
Based on these demographic projections, I predict that SP&M issues will
be a challenge to many nations by the year 2025. Many organizations, both
large and small, will need to devote attention to succession issues in a way
they have not traditionally done. Also influential will be national policies that
encourage the employment of older citizens. Expect that many nations will
Exhibit 14-3. Age Distribution of the U.S. Population in 2025
Male
United States: 2025
14
12
10
8
6
4
2
85+
80–84
75–79
70–74
65–69
60–64
55–59
50–54
45–49
40–44
35–39
30–34
25–29
20–24
15–19
10–14
5–9
0–4
Female
0 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14
Population (in millions)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2000). Population pyramid summary for the U.S. http://www.census.gov/egi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs
..pl?ctyIN&outs&ymax250.

The Future of Succession Planning and Management
319
Exhibit 14-4. Age Distribution of the Chinese Population in 2025
Male
China: 2025
85+
80–84
75–79
70–74
65–69
60–64
55–59
50–54
45–49
40–44
35–39
30–34
25–29
20–24
15–19
10–14
5–9
0–4
Female
70 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
Population (in millions)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2000). Population pyramid summary for China. http://www.census.gov/egi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs
..pl?ctyIN&outs&ymax250.
Exhibit 14-5. Age Distribution of the Population in the United Kingdom in
2025
Male
United Kingdom: 2025
Female
85+
80–84
75–79
70–74
65–69
60–64
55–59
50–54
45–49
40–44
35–39
30–34
25–29
20–24
15–19
10–14
5–9
0–4
2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Population (in millions)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2000). Population pyramid summary for the United Kingdom. http://www.census.gov/egi-bin/
ipc/idbpyrs..pl?ctyIN&outs&ymax250.
begin to focus on older workers and institute policies to encourage people to
retire later. These older workers will represent an important political group,
exerting influence directly or indirectly on government policymakers.
Although managers in the United States are often tempted to think only in
terms of domestic talent, the fact remains that SP&M issues have a global impact
and may require a global solution. At one time, many companies relied
heavily on expatriate labor forces to meet succession needs globally. In other

320 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 14-6. Age Distribution of the French Population in 2025
Male
France: 2025
85+
80–84
75–79
70–74
65–69
60–64
55–59
50–54
45–49
40–44
35–39
30–34
25–29
20–24
15–19
10–14
5–9
0–4
Female
2.5 2.0 1.5 1.0 0.5 0.0 0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5
Population (in millions)
Source: U.S. Census Bureau (2000). Population pyramid summary for France. http://www.census.gov/egi-bin/ipc/idbpyrs
..pl?ctyIN&outs&ymax250.
words, when they needed specialized skills not available in the developing
world, they simply exported talent from the developed world. But this strategy
is less frequently used as decision-makers pursue localization strategies designed
to identify and accelerate the development of high-potential local
talent. 9
A localization strategy has many advantages. One such advantage is that it
builds the bench strength across the corporation, serving as a rising tide that
lifts all boats. In other words, the corporation builds bench strength everywhere
rather than relying on exported talent. A second advantage is that local
talent faces no problems adapting to the local culture the way expatriates do.
A third advantage is that local talent is not resented, as expatriates often are,
for the higher wages and better benefit packages they receive. A fourth advantage
is that a localization strategy provides political and public relations advantages,
since the organizations are seen as building the local economy rather
than exploiting it.
In the future, localization efforts will increase. Government policymakers
may even require it. Additionally, forward-thinking corporations will find ways
to hitchhike on the talent they have internationally by using online and other
virtual methods to encourage ‘‘sharing,’’ telecommuting, videocommuting,
concurrent work (prepared in one nation but used in another), and idea generation
across borders. These developments have profound implications for
SP&M, since they can build competencies at the same time as the work is
performed.
The challenge for SP&M program coordinators will be to find ways to carry
so-called soft skills technologies—such as management and HR practices—
across cultures. That may require special programs to encourage information-

The Future of Succession Planning and Management
321
sharing and skill building across cultures, through either online or face-to-face
approaches.
Prediction 4: Succession Issues Will Be Influenced by Real-Time Technological Innovations
As Chapter 12 showed, technological innovation is already exerting a major
influence on succession issues. This trend will continue. Right now, many organizations
are using online methods for recruitment. In the future, online
methods will be used in real time to conduct competency modeling, potential
assessment, performance appraisal, individual development planning, and individual
coaching.
The challenge for SP&M program coordinators will be to find and apply
these approaches. One major goal, of course, is to slash cycle time for filling
key positions and sourcing talent. Another major goal is to lower geographical
barriers, making it possible to access—and develop—talent anywhere and at
any time.
Prediction 5: Succession Planning and Management Will Emerge as an Issue in
Government Agencies, Academic Institutions, and Nonprofit Enterprises
Traditionally, sectors of the economy other than business have been slow to
adopt effective SP&M practices. Government agencies, academic institutions,
and nonprofit enterprises have not typically attempted to identify replacements
for key positions and have often relied on a talent-pool approach, which
is more consistent with the laws, rules, regulations, political realities, and organizational
cultures found in these economic sectors. Additionally, government
agencies and academic institutions in particular have found systematic succession
approaches difficult to use because of institutional policies or civil service
regulations that require competitive searches, job posting, and preferences
based on factors other than individual performance. Efforts to groom individuals
in these settings have sometimes been prohibited rather than encouraged.
One result has been long lead times between the appearance of a vacancy and
the appointment of a successor.
However, as a direct result of increasing turnover, increasing retirement
rates, lagging salary and performance bonuses, and the greater rewards in a
private-sector economy that makes the (relative) security of government service
and academic appointments less appealing than they once were, I predict
that government agencies and academic institutions will be forced to adopt
more systematic succession practices. It is no longer effective to follow the
business-as-usual approach of ‘‘calling for the list’’ of qualified individuals who
have taken civil service exams or ‘‘conducting a national search’’ for each academic
appointment by simply placing one advertisement in the Chronicle of
Higher Education. The reason? There are few, if any, candidates on the civil

322 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
service ‘‘list’’ and few, if any, applicants sending in material to Chronicle advertisements
for academic positions. This problem is particularly acute at senior
levels in government and in educational institutions, where people do not
want or need to move.
It is important to understand that these problems take different shapes in
government, educational institutions, and nonprofit organizations; hence,
they require different solution strategies. Within each economic sector, differences
in procedures also exist. For example, in government, human resource
practices have not been the same among local, state, and federal agencies. In
academic institutions, human resource practices have differed among government-supported
and privately funded colleges and universities. In nonprofit
enterprises, unlike in government agencies and academic institutions, the intrinsic
satisfaction of the work has mediated the need to pay competitive salaries
or provide competitive benefits.
However, these three economic sectors do share similar challenges. Indeed,
the key challenge is to find better ways to recruit, retain, motivate, and
cultivate talent without sacrificing existing civil service laws and rules and without
sacrificing merit-based employment in favor of political patronage, nepotism,
or unlawful discrimination. There are no simple answers, and each
institution needs to form a task force and focus attention on improving succession
within the framework of its existing policies, procedures, and governmental
laws, rules, and regulations. The challenge for SP&M program coordinators
will be to find ways to adapt the approaches recommended in this book to the
unique settings of government agencies, academic institutions, and nonprofit
enterprises.
Prediction 6: Succession Planning and Management Will Lead to an Increasing Policy of
Organizational Openness
Many organizations still do not share information about openings with the
prospective successors for key positions. Some executives worry that such
openness might lead to problems such as ‘‘greenmail’’ or the ‘‘crown prince
dilemma.’’ Greenmail occurs when designated successors attract lucrative offers
from other employers and then leverage them to achieve counteroffers
from their current employers. The crown prince dilemma occurs when designated
successors believe they are guaranteed advancement, rest on their laurels,
and let their performance decline.
Despite these potential problems, however, I predict that organizations
will be forced to become more open about naming future successors. If they
do not, they risk losing their high potentials to employers that are more open,
make promises, and are forthcoming in offering attractive employment packages
that include professional development opportunities.

323 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Prediction 7: Succession Planning and Management Will Increasingly Be Integrated with
Career Development
Career planning and management programs are usually planned by individuals.
They are thus planned from the bottom up. Succession planning and management
programs are usually planned by senior executives, and are thus
planned from the top down. As described elsewhere in the book, the two work
together and should be integrated.
In the future, decision-makers will recognize how important it is to have
both. Their synergistic power is greater than the sum of their individual parts.
For that reason, organizations will revive company-sponsored career-planning
and management programs to empower individuals with greater responsibility
to prepare themselves for the future. This also serves as a double-check on,
and verification of, replacement and succession plans.
The challenge for SP&M program coordinators will be to find ways to
integrate career and succession programs. Exhibit 14-7 lists some important
characteristics of career planning and management programs. Exhibit 14-8
provides an assessment sheet for you to structure your thinking about ways to
integrate career planning and management programs with SP&M programs.
Prediction 8: Succession Planning and Management Will Be Heavily Influenced by
Concerns about Work/Family Balance and Spirituality
A competitive economy has led many managers to devote more time to their
work. In fact, the average number of hours per week that managers work has
been on the rise. The same may well be true of other groups. That, in turn,
has prompted many people to question their priorities. There is more to life
than work, and they know it. Some seek more time with their families or others
in their lives. Some look for religion or a deeper feeling about the meaning of
life. These desires to balance work and life or achieve a greater sense of spirituality
are major drivers for change. I predict that these will become issues of
growing importance to organizational decision-makers. They will find that
high potentials refuse additional responsibility if that responsibility requires
too much personal sacrifice. This situation includes job assignments that
prompt upheavals in their personal lives.
The challenge for SP&M program coordinators will be to find ways to help
high potentials balance their work responsibilities and their personal lives.
This may require using time off as an incentive or giving people time away
from work so they can balance work and personal life or pursue their spirituality.
Prediction 9: Succession Planning and Management Will Focus Increasingly on Real-Time
Talent-Development Efforts as Well as Strategic Efforts
The manager has a role in developing talent. That is a daily responsibility,
not a one-time-a-year-effort to be discussed, and managed, in a talent show.
(text continues on page 328)

324 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 14-7. Important Characteristics of Career Planning and
Management Programs
Directions: Use this worksheet to rate your organization on how well it addresses
important issues in career planning and management. For each characteristic of an
effective career planning and management program listed in the left column below,
rate how well you believe your organization rates on that characteristic in the right
column. Use the following scale:
1 Not at All Effective
2 Somewhat Ineffective
3 Somewhat Effective
4 Effective
Characteristic of a Career
Rating
Planning and Management
Program
Not at All Somewhat Somewhat
The career planning and Effective Ineffective Effective Effective
management program is: 1 2 3 4
1 Focused on meeting spe- 1 2 3 4
cific business needs or issues
of the organization.
2 Targeted on specific groups 1 2 3 4
in the organization.
3 Responsive to the organiza- 1 2 3 4
tion’s unique corporate
culture and ‘‘ways of doing
things.’’
4 Organized around a uni- 1 2 3 4
fied model that can be easily
and readily explained to
such stakeholders as managers
and workers.
5 Based on a comprehensive 1 2 3 4
approach that goes well
beyond a ‘‘one-shot’’ approach
to addressing career
planning in the
organization.

The Future of Succession Planning and Management
325
6 Involves, and thereby com- 1 2 3 4
mands the ownership of, all
key stakeholder groups
(such as executives, managers,
HR specialists, and
workers).
7 Well publicized to stake- 1 2 3 4
holders.
8 Evaluated both on how well 1 2 3 4
it helps individuals achieve
their goals and the organization
achieves its goals.
Score
Add up the numbers in the column
above and place the sum in the box
below:
Interpretation of the Score
Score 1–8
Score 9–16
Score 17–24
Score 25
Your organization does not have a career planning
and management program—or, if your
organization does possess such a program, it is
regarded as singularly ineffective. Grade it as
an F.
Your organization possesses a career planning
and management program, but it is not regarded
as effective or useful; only as somewhat
so. Grade it as a C.
Your organization’s career planning and management
program is regarded as generally effective.
Grade it a B.
Your organization’s career planning and management
program is regarded as highly successful
and effective. Grade it an A.

326 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Exhibit 14-8. An Assessment Sheet for Integrating Career Planning and
Management Programs with Succession Planning and Management
Programs
Directions: Use this worksheet to assess how well your organization’s career planning
and management program is integrated with your SP&M program. For each
characteristic of effective career and succession programs listed in the left column
below, rate how well you believe your organization has integrated them in the right
columns. Use the following scale:
1 Not at All Integrated
2 Somewhat Integrated—but Not Enough
3 Well Integrated
4 Very Well Integrated
Characteristics of Effective
Rating
Career and
Somewhat
Succession Programs
Integrated
Both the career planning and Not at All —but Not Well Very Well
management program and Integrated Enough Integrated Integrated
the SP&M program: 1 2 3 4
1 Are focused on meeting 1 2 3 4
specific business needs.
2 Are guided by program 1 2 3 4
objectives that have
been compared and integrated.
3 Use work requirements 1 2 3 4
or competencies as common
denominators.
4 Identify gaps between 1 2 3 4
what people know or can
do now and what they
need to know.
5 Clarify what career goals 1 2 3 4
are sought by individuals.

The Future of Succession Planning and Management
327
6 Can, and often do, use 1 2 3 4
full-circle, multirater assessments.
7 Rely on individual devel- 1 2 3 4
opment plans to narrow
individual developmental
gaps.
8 Are evaluated. 1 2 3 4
Score
Add up the numbers in the column
above and place the sum in the box
below:
Interpretation of the Score
Score 1–8
Score 9–16
Score 17–24
Score 25
Your organization has not integrated career
planning and management with SP&M.
Your organization has somewhat integrated career
planning and management with SP&M.
However, they are not perceived as sufficiently
integrated.
Your organization has effectively integrated career
planning and management with SP&M.
Your organization has succeeded in achieving
a very good integration between career planning
and management with SP&M.

328 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
Organizational leaders can encourage that practice by rewarding managers for
talent development, establishing mentoring programs (see the CD-ROM that
comes with this book for a briefing on mentoring programs), and clarifying
their role as managers in cultivating talent (see the CD-ROM that comes with
this book for a briefing on the manager’s role in succession planning and
management).
Most development occurs on the job. The kinds of assignments that managers
give their workers build their competencies. That is why experience is
prized in organizations. That experience can be managed in such a way that
workers can build their capabilities while meeting the real-time requirements
of the organization. Managing that situation on a daily basis is the manager’s
job. I predict that, in the future, organizational leaders will do a better job of
building managers’ abilities to develop their workers’ talents in real time.
Prediction 10: Succession Planning and Management Will Center as Much on Ethical and
Value-Oriented Issues as on Competency-Based Issues
Earlier in the book, I explained that, as a result of the Enron and other corporate
scandals, leaders have recognized that performance cannot be gained at
any price. It must be constrained by legal, moral, and ethical considerations. I
predict that potential assessment will increasingly survey how well individuals
comply with corporate codes of conduct, as well as meet other ethical, moral,
and legal standards. Indeed, the mere appearance of impropriety can lead to
onerous new regulations; consequently, organizational leaders will insist that
individuals being considered for more management responsibility—or more
demanding professional and technical responsibility—be measured against
ethical, moral, and legal standards as well as competency-based (productivity)
standards.
Prediction 11: Succession Planning and Management Will Become More Fully Integrated
with Selection Decisions
Some competencies can be developed, but others must be selected for. As a
result, it is essential that development and selection efforts be integrated. During
competency identification efforts, HR professionals and others may need
to pinpoint which competencies can be developed and which must be selected
for.
Prediction 12: Succession Planning and Management Will Focus on Leveraging Talent as
Well as Developing It
It is not enough to develop talent. Since some people are more productive or
creative than others, the challenge is to leverage that ability to mentor, coach,
and build the competencies of others. A challenge for organizational leaders
is to find ways to match those who possess unique talents and strengths with

The Future of Succession Planning and Management
329
those who can stand to develop those competencies. Mentoring can occur
between peers and not just between an individual and those at higher levels
of the corporate hierarchy.
Prediction 13: Succession Planning and Management Includes Alternatives to One-Hireat-a-Time
Approaches, Such as Mergers, Acquisitions, or Takeovers, for the Purpose of
Rapid and Broad-Based Talent Acquisition
Organizations can acquire talent in more than one way, and one way to acquire
talent is to hire it. A second way is to develop it. But there are alternatives.
For example, yet another approach is to merge, acquire, or take over other
organizations that enjoy talent that may be otherwise lacking in the organization.
Think of it as a blood transfusion. A merger, acquisition, or takeover can
inject a lot of talent at once into the organization.
Of course, great care should be exercised in such ventures. If the corporate
cultures of the two organizations are not compatible, talent will vanish
through attrition. For that reason, organizational leaders should take steps to
reassure the talented people in an organization being merged, acquired, or
taken over that their futures are not in jeopardy. Without such due diligence,
the high potentials may leave quickly, rendering the whole change effort a
failure.
Prediction 14: Succession Planning and Management Will Become Closely Linked to Risk
Management and Concerns About Security
The unexpected loss of talent can occur in more than one way. Accidents happen,
but if the organization’s leaders take steps to minimize the impact of such
accidents, they are acting prudently with the talent of the organization. It is for
this reason that some organizations limit how many executives may travel on
the same plane, in the same automobile, on the same bus, or in any other
vehicle.
Another issue to consider is what to do in the event of the sudden loss of
an entire facility. It is no longer unthinkable that a whole city could be lost.
Will the organization be able to function if the corporate headquarters is destroyed,
as happened to several companies when the World Trade Center
towers collapsed? Organizational leaders should thus do scenario planning to
prepare for such catastrophic losses of human as well as physical assets.
Prediction 15: Succession Planning and Management Will Become Associated with More
than Management Succession
Most people have traditionally associated succession planning and management
with management succession. Moving up the organization chart has
been a traditional focus, as has finding those who can be groomed for such

330 C LOSING THE ‘‘DEVELOPMENTAL G AP’’
advancement. But advancement can mean more than management succession.
For example, it can also mean advancement along a horizontal continuum of
professional competence. 10
Summary
This chapter has offered fifteen predictions about succession planning and
management. In the future, succession planning and management will: (1)
Prompt efforts by decision-makers to find flexible strategies to address future
organizational talent needs; (2) lead to integrated retention policies and procedures
that are intended to identify high-potential talent earlier, retain that
talent, and preserve older high-potential workers; (3) have a global impact; (4)
be influenced increasingly by real-time technological innovations; (5) become
an issue in government agencies, academic institutions, and nonprofit enterprises
in a way never before seen; (6) lead to increasing organizational openness
about possible successors; (7) increasingly be integrated with careerdevelopment
issues; (8) be heavily influenced in the future by concerns about
work/family balance and spirituality; (9) focus increasingly on real-time talentdevelopment
efforts as well as strategic efforts, which center around the role
of managers in daily work with their reports; (10) center as much around
ethical and value-oriented issues as around competency-based issues; (11) become
more fully integrated with selection decisions; (12) focus on leveraging
talent as well as developing it; (13) include alternatives to one-hire-at-a-time
approaches, such as mergers, acquisitions, or takeovers for the purpose of
rapid and broad-based talent acquisition; (14) become closely linked to risk
management and concerns about security; and (15) become associated with
more than management succession.

A P P E N D I X
I
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS
(FAQs) ABOUT SUCCESSION
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
1. What is succession planning?
Simply stated, succession planning is a process of developing talent to meet
the needs of the organization now and in the future. Every time a manager
makes a work assignment, he or she is preparing someone for the future because
he or she is building that worker’s ability. Work experience builds competence,
and different kinds of work experience build different kinds of
competence.
2. How is succession planning different from replacement planning?
Replacement planning is about finding backups to fill vacancies on an organization
chart. But succession planning is about grooming the talent needed for
the future. They are related but different activities.
3. Why is succession planning needed?
Organizational leaders need to think about aligning their staffing and leadership
needs with the organization’s future strategic objectives. If they do not
take action to establish an effective succession planning and management program,
they are likely to fall victim to the so-called like me problem. That is the
dilemma in which people are biased to pick other people like themselves,
viewing them more favorably. It is not intentional discrimination but, rather,
human nature—to see the world through our own lenses. For that reason,
men tend to prefer men, women prefer women, engineers prefer engineers,
and so forth. The more ways that you are like your boss, the more likely your
boss is to regard you favorably. Since there is a tendency to want to ‘‘clone’’
job incumbents for successors, organizations must take steps to counteract
that built-in bias, for the simple reason that the job incumbent of today, while
331

332 A PPENDIX I
perhaps perfectly suited for the business environment now, may not be suitable
for the business environment of the future. For that reason, organizational
leaders must take steps to determine how many and what kind of people
are needed for the future so that succession plans can pick winners who can
help the organization realize its strategic objectives.
4. Why are organizational leaders interested in succession planning
and management now?
Many organizations are experiencing the effects of aging workforces that are
putting them at risk of losing their most experienced workers to retirement.
At the same time, concerns about terrorism have raised the stakes on prudent
planning to ensure that leaders, and other key workers, have backups in case
they are needed. Finally, years of downsizing and other cost-cutting measures
have reduced the internal bench strength of many organizations so that it is
more difficult to find internal replacements. Since most managers do not want
to wait a long time to fill critical positions, and organizations have downsized
such that external talent is not readily available, many organizational leaders
are taking steps now to ‘‘grow their own talent,’’ particularly for those hardto-fill
internal positions that require extensive, unique knowledge of ‘‘the way
we do things here.’’
5. What are the essential components of a succession planning
program?
Think about the following:
▲ The Purpose of the Program. Why do you need it? (Do not assume that
all executives of the organization will just naturally share the same objectives.
They will not. Some will want some things; others will want
others. But confused goals will not lead to effective results.)
▲ The Measurable Objectives of the Program. What measurable results are
desired from it over time?
▲ The Competencies Needed for Success Now. What kind of person is
needed to be a successful performer in every department and at every
organizational level?
▲ The Way Those Competencies Are Measured. How well is the organization’s
performance management system measuring present competencies?
(That is needed because we only want to promote those who are
succeeding in their current jobs.)
▲ The Competencies Needed for Success in the Future. What kind of person
is needed to be a successful performer in every department, and at

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Succession Planning and Management
333
every organizational level in the future, if the organization is to realize
its strategic objectives?
▲ The Way the Organization Assesses Potential. How do we know that
someone can succeed at a future, higher level of responsibility if we
have never seen him or her perform it? (Think of this as measuring
performance against future, as yet unperformed, job challenges.)
▲ Narrowing Gaps. How do we narrow gaps between the person’s present
job requirements and present performance and his or her future targets
or possible future levels and what he or she needs to know or do to be
ready for that higher-level or more difficult responsibility?
▲ Evaluating Results. How do we know that our efforts to narrow gaps
are working and that the succession program is achieving its mission
and accomplishing its measurable objectives?
6. How does an organization get started establishing and
implementing a succession planning and management program if it has
not had one before?
Start by ‘‘making the business case,’’ which means ‘‘showing a compelling
business need to establish and implement a succession program.’’ (Some people
say ‘‘find a burning platform.’’) Based on that case, establish the goals to
be addressed by the program. How exactly do you make the business case?
Here are some possibilities:
▲ Conduct a study of the projected retirements in your organization by
going to your payroll system and asking for a report that shows the
projected retirement dates of everyone on the payroll. Then dig deeper
to see projected retirement dates by job level (position on the organization
chart), geographical location, department, job code, and any other
specifics that may be important to your organization. Then do the same
work by examining projected retirement dates over rolling three-year
periods. Remember that some people will not retire when they are eligible,
but you are simply assessing risks.
▲ Ask executives what would happen if the whole senior team was wiped
out at once in a plane crash, car accident, or bombing of corporate
headquarters.
▲ Ask each manager how he or she would advise handling his or her sudden
loss due to death, disability, or accident. Who is the backup, and
how did he or she determine that person?
Of course, you may be able to come up with some other ways to build a business
case, depending on the unique business conditions that your organization
faces. But start with a persuasive argument, since succession planning is

334 A PPENDIX I
one of those things like buying burial plots that everyone knows should be
done but wants to put off doing. (In fact, the old joke is that succession is
something we are too busy to do when business is good and too expensive to
do when business is bad. The result is that we never do it.)
7. What’s the return-on-investment for succession planning and
management programs?
Nobody knows the average ROI for succession planning and management programs.
Even best-in-class companies have not effectively measured it. (By the
way, what is the ROI of your accounting department?) Determine ROI by starting
with the measurable objectives to be achieved by the program. Find out
what it costs—and how long it takes—to fill vacancies today. Then find out
what it costs—and how long it takes—to fill vacancies after the succession
planning and management program is up and running. Use these figures to
show the costs and benefits of an SP&M program.
8. What are the most common problems that organizations experience
in getting started on a succession planning and management program?
Common problems in getting started on a succession planning and management
program include:
▲ Defining it as an HR problem rather than as a responsibility shared by
the board of directors, senior leadership team, managers at all levels
of the organization, and even individual workers. Everyone has some
responsibility to groom talent to meet the organization’s future needs.
▲ Understaffing the effort. A good succession program requires time and
effort. Someone must coordinate that. It cannot be ‘‘completely outsourced.’’
Consultants can help, but they cannot ‘‘do it for you.’’ Managers
cannot abdicate responsibility—or accountability.
▲ Establishing confused or overly ambitious goals. If the organization’s
leaders do not focus the succession effort on specific, and measurable,
objectives to be achieved, the succession program will lack goal clarity
and resources will be wasted in pursuing many confusing, overlapping,
and perhaps conflicting goals. You have to be clear about what you want
before a program can be established to accomplish it.
▲ Failing to hold people accountable. This is perhaps the biggest problem
facing all succession programs. What happens if this year’s individual
development plans are not met by an individual? What happens if the
senior executive in charge of a division does not meet measurable talent-development
objectives for his or her division? These questions center
on accountability. Different organizations solve the problem in

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) About Succession Planning and Management
335
different ways, depending on corporate culture. But the real question
is, ‘‘How do we arrange consequences for building talent or failing to
build talent?’’ ‘‘How does talent development stack up against meeting
the numbers for this week, month, quarter, or year, and what do we
do if we are making profits or sales but not grooming people for the
future?’’
9. What are the biggest benefits that organizations experience from a
succession planning and management program?
If an organization has established an effective succession planning program,
organizational leaders should expect that:
▲ It will take less time and expense to source talent to fill vacancies because
the talent has already been identified and prepared.
▲ People-development efforts have been aligned with the organization’s
strategic objectives so that the right people will be available at the right
times and in the right places to meet the right objectives.
▲ The organization is prepared to deal with sudden, catastrophic losses
of key people.
10. What is the role of the corporate board in a succession planning
and management program? CEO in a succession planning and
management program? What is the senior management team’s role?
What is the HR department’s role? What is the individual’s role?
▲ The board should ensure that an effective succession planning and management
program exists and is actually working effectively.
▲ The CEO is personally responsible for ensuring that an effective succession
planning and management program exists and works effectively. If
he or she does not, it is like a pilot who is not flying the airplane. If the
plane crashes, who is responsible?
▲ Senior managers are like the co-pilots of the airplane. Each is responsible
for establishing talent development objectives for his or her own
division or department and then meeting those objectives.
▲ The HR department provides support for the effort by arranging for the
policies, procedures, technology, and other support to help ensure that
the ‘‘plane flies in the right direction.’’ Think of the HR vice president’s
role as akin to the navigator of the plane. He or she gives advice to the
pilot where and how to fly and provides on-the-spot advice about how
to deal with unique problems, situations, or challenges.

336 A PPENDIX I
▲ Department managers are responsible for attracting, identifying, developing,
and retaining talent for their respective departments. They
should realize that they are responsible—and accountable—for both
‘‘making the numbers’’ and ‘‘grooming talent to meet the organization’s
future requirements.’’
▲ Individuals are responsible for knowing what they want out of life, their
careers, and the organization. They are also responsible for developing
themselves for the future. While there is nothing wrong with individuals
‘‘wanting to stay where they are’’—particularly if that stems from a
work/life balance decision—individuals have a responsibility to let people
know what their objectives are so long as it does not hurt their own
interests and possible future employability.

A P P E N D I X
I I
CASE STUDIES ON SUCCESSION
PLANNING AND MANAGEMENT
The case studies in this Appendix are meant to represent a broad range of
succession planning and management programs drawn from previously published
accounts. They represent both best-practice and typical-practice cases.
Read them and note the similarities—and the differences—that exist in succession
planning and management efforts across a spectrum of organizations.
Case 1: How Business Plans for Succession:
Matching Talent with Tasks
With 61,000 workers in more than ninety countries, Dole Food Company Inc. has
talent all over the world. Only a few hundred of those employees are in top
management at the 151-year-old company headquartered in Westlake Village,
California, which produces and markets fruits, vegetables, and flowers. Trouble
is, Dole doesn’t have comprehensive knowledge of who these managers are or
what they can do.
To be sure, business-unit leaders know their own direct reports well—their
strengths, weaknesses, experience, and career goals. The problem is, these leaders
have no way to share that knowledge with other business units. If a key job
opens up in North America, the business-unit leader wouldn’t know if the perfect
candidate worked in another Dole unit in South America. Dole has no way to
match its top managerial talent with its executive needs.
But that is changing. The highly decentralized company is launching a succession
planning process, supported by Web-based software, through which
Dole executives hope to rectify their inability to promote the best and the brightest
across the corporation.
‘‘We are looking to execute an organized process where we will identify
weaknesses and strengths of our people and build plans to deal with that,’’ says
George Horne, Dole’s vice president of administration and support operations.
Source: Bill Roberts, ‘‘Matching Talents with Tasks,’’ HR Magazine 47:11 (2002), 91–93. Used with
permission of HR Magazine.
337

338 A PPENDIX II
‘‘We also want to identify areas where we will need to bring in some people from
outside to fill some gaps at the top.’’
Knowing Your People
Succession planning used to mean that a company president hoped his oldest
child would join the family business and replace Dad someday. If not the oldest,
then any child would do. Today, succession planning—also called workforce
planning or progression planning—means having the right person in the right
place at the right time for the right job, says Ren Nardoni, senior vice president at
Pilat NAI, a Lebanon, New Jersey, subsidiary of Pilat Technologies International
Ltd. of London. It means knowing your people; knowing their strengths, experience,
and career goals; and knowing where they need development. Succession
planning helps HR and managers know what to do if a position becomes vacant.
‘‘You’re looking for the vulnerabilities of the organization,’’ he says.
Succession planning has grown more important since the 1980s and picked
up steam in the 1990s. These days, experts say, most Fortune 500 companies take
succession planning seriously, and many smaller companies embrace it. Marc
Kaiser, a consultant with Hewitt Associates in Lincolnshire, Illinois, says savvy
companies recognize that they must be prepared to tackle the leadership gap
created by retiring baby boomers. The ability to easily automate succession planning
using the Web also drives interest. ‘‘It is easier now, and that’s one reason
people are doing it,’’ he says.
Most companies that adopt succession planning automate it with software.
Nardoni estimates that 50 percent to 60 percent of the Fortune 500 and 30 percent
of the largest 2,500 U.S. companies have installed succession planning systems,
either stand-alone software or the succession-planning module in their HR management
system (HRMS). ‘‘Our average client starts with succession planning for
between 150 and 250 positions. The minute you get above 50 to 75 positions, it
becomes a pain in the butt on paper,’’ he says.
Government agencies, such as the Federal Aviation Administration, also embrace
succession planning, Nardoni says, because they have to plan for people
moving in and out and retiring. However, the government’s succession planning
initiatives don’t have the same intensity as those of the Fortune 500, he adds.
Succession planning correlates positively with the bottom line, says Nardoni.
Kaiser points to a 2002 Hewitt study, ‘‘Top 20 Companies for Leaders,’’ that
shows that companies with reputations as good places to work have stronger
succession planning and commit more resources to it, including the CEO’s time.
Hewitt surveyed some 348 HR executives and CEOs at 240 publicly held companies
on various leadership topics, identifying companies that succeed in attracting,
developing, and retaining leaders, and noting the practices that influenced
their success.
Dole’s Culture Change
Succession planning was one of several corporate-wide initiatives Dole launched
in the past 18 months to decrease decentralization in an attempt to improve the

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
339
bottom line, Horne says. The company was No. 353 in the Fortune 500 in 2002
with revenues of more than $4.6 billion.
Historically, Horne explains, Dole’s seven business units were so autonomous
that corporate wasn’t much more than a holding company. When Larry
Kern became president in February 2001, he set out to keep as much decentralization
as made sense while adding some corporatewide accountability and
processes.
Succession planning (Dole calls it progression planning) was one such
change. The process itself would require a change of culture and could become
an agent for further culture change. ‘‘The idea of succession planning is contrary
to being highly decentralized,’’ says Sue Hagen, vice president of HR for North
American operations, who led the effort.
Although Dole’s annual turnover rate among top management is less than 10
percent, succession planning was on its radar screen for years, says Hagen. ‘‘Talent
is scarce. Time and cost to ramp someone up in our business is difficult and
costly. It makes going outside more difficult.’’
Hagen talked informally to all corporate executives, and the leaders and staffs
of each business unit, to generate consensus for succession planning for corporate
positions—corporate officers, business unit presidents and their direct reports.
The initial group would be about 100, she says. Next year, another few
hundred will be included.
The reaction was mostly positive, Hagen says. ‘‘We got a range of responses.
It was more an issue of education, especially for the businesses based outside the
United States. We had to educate them to what the objectives were going to be
and why we do it centrally rather than decentralized.’’
Senior management approved the project, and Kern is especially enthusiastic,
Hagen says. ‘‘He wants us to maximize the internal talent we have.’’
Defining the Processes
Hagen’s next step was to hold a series of in-depth interviews with the executives
to determine which succession planning processes were needed and how often
they should be conducted. The goal was to reflect as much of their thinking as
possible. ‘‘One division wanted to review succession plans on their people six
times a year. Another didn’t want to do it at all,’’ she says. Hagen compromised:
Succession planning will be conducted twice a year. She also identified four competencies
on which everyone would be evaluated: accountability, business acumen,
multifunctionality (cross-training), and vision/originality.
Kaiser and another Hewitt consultant, Lisa Labat, assisted Hagen with the
Dole project. ‘‘One of the first questions we ask organizations is, ‘What are the
business needs?’ ’’ says Labat. They also ask, ‘‘What is your business today and
where are you going to be taking it? What does that mean for the talent you need
in place, especially at the top?’’
Hagen did not want software to dictate the process, nor did she want to create
a process and then search for software that exactly fit. Instead, she started to look

340 A PPENDIX II
at software while developing the process itself, looking for a package that is
flexible, needs little customization, and is easy to learn. The Hewitt consultants
pointed her toward several products but did not participate in the selection.
Hagen also networked with other HR professionals who had adopted successionplanning
software.
Many HRMS software suites have an optional succession-planning module,
but neither Dole nor its business units have an HRMS. Since most employees are
farm or factory workers, there is not much need for the detailed information an
HRMS provides, says Hagen. ‘‘It would be overkill.’’ In a way, the succession
planning software Dole adopted will become a mini-HRMS for top personnel,
she adds.
Hagen also wanted an application service provider (ASP) model. Outsourcing,
including payroll, is common at Dole. Hagen didn’t want to own and support
technology, and she didn’t want the small corporate information technology staff
to have to work on it.
About 20 percent of the requests for proposals that Pilat NAI sees request an
ASP model, and 50 percent want information about that option, Nardoni says. He
expects 25 percent or more of his business to be ASP-based in the next two years.
Hagen identified products from nine companies and asked for presentations
from four. She chose Pilat NAI’s succession planning software because it was
cost-effective and flexible. The inner workings of the system are invisible to Dole.
Pilat NAI runs the software on one of its servers for a monthly fee based on
the number of users who will be system administrators plus a flat fee for the first
1,000 records stored on the software. Hagen serves as vendor manager, and a
coworker handles day-to-day contact with Pilat NAI regarding development,
troubleshooting, and user issues. The contract spells out confidentiality and firewall
protection for the data.
Hagen began the project in March, selected the software in April, and began
installing in May. The project began to roll out in September, and Dole expects
to produce the first reports for management by the end of this year.
A Plan for Each Manager
Installation required less than 10 percent customization and did not require the
full-time involvement of anyone at Dole. One HR person pulled data from the
payroll system and fed it into the succession-planning database, but that was a
onetime task. The basic data gives users a starting point.
The users—top managers—access the program from the Web with a password.
They fill out a resume, including career interests, and note any mobility
restrictions. They assess themselves on the four competencies. When they are
done, the system automatically notifies their manager, who does an assessment
and indicates whether he or she thinks the individual could be promoted. The
manager also assesses overall potential and the risk of losing the user. This assessment
then goes automatically to the division head, then the divisional HR
director, then Hagen.

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
341
All assessments will be pulled together in a report, to be reviewed by Kern,
Horne, legal counsel, and the chief financial officer. Hagen will use the information
to create a career development plan for each individual, including seminars
she’ll organize. She’ll also direct business unit leaders to potential candidates in
other units when they have appropriate openings.
‘‘The beauty is, for the first time we’ll have a database that ties together these
talent metrics and can serve as a clearinghouse for people available for opportunities,’’
Hagen says. The system will also help Dole identify where it has talent
gaps so it can better recruit from outside, adds Horne.
Dole’s corporate management hopes all business units will eventually adopt
similar succession planning processes and software, Hagen says. ‘‘I view this as
a pilot, a very visible pilot,’’ she says. ‘‘To get the buy-in of individual business
units, we’ll show them that this was adopted by their senior management and
that it works.’’
Case 2: How Government Plans for Succession:
Public-Sector Succession—A Strategic Approach to Sustaining Innovation
In the public and private sectors alike, demand for change is the one constant.
There is a loud call for leaders who can accommodate change personally and
who can initiate and drive broad changes in their organizations. These demands
make sense but raise a troubling issue. By relentlessly insisting on change, are
we risking the loss of innovations recently realized? This is a particularly salient
question for public-sector agencies, which are currently under attack from all
sides.
In this article, I assert that while change must be on the agenda of any public
agency for its very survival as well as for the public good, it is just as important
to ensure that gains achieved in one administration be given a fair assessment
and not be jettisoned, without review, to the god of change. Indeed, the importance
of ‘‘sustained innovation’’—essentially keeping change alive—is an increasing
challenge for public agencies. 1
Will innovative programs created as a response to social problems be allowed
to live out their ‘‘natural’’ lives, or will they be killed off before their time, independent
of performance and outcomes? This issue is particularly acute in the
transition between elected or appointed government officials—especially in a
highly politicized environment that limits government’s capacity to continue efforts
across administrations. Moreover, one critical tool available to the private
sector, succession planning, is rarely used by public agencies because the executive’s
fortunes are generally tied to a particular administration. Many public-sector
leaders have devised strategies for continuing efforts across administrations.
Source: Ellen Schall, ‘‘Public-Sector Succession: A Strategic Approach to Sustaining Innovation,’’
Public Administration Review 57:1 (1997), 4–10. Used with permission of Public Administration
Review.

342 A PPENDIX II
Some establish support beyond the government, for example, from the business
community or other local ‘‘elites’’; some obtain early bipartisan political support.
Still others avoid program demise by identifying a champion linked to the incoming
administration so as to have a voice ‘‘inside,’’ or by creating wide support
within the agency (and other agencies) so that the new governor or mayor hears
a consistent message. Finally, some administrators have succeeded in winning
national recognition for their innovations so that discontinuing them is a perceived
political risk.
As important as these approaches are, innovations also can be sustained by
cabinet secretaries or agency heads engaging in succession planning, even
though these people are as vulnerable to shifting political winds as their superiors.
In fact, this level, where so much actual and potential innovation resides,
represents a real opportunity for both preserving innovations and transferring
them to subsequent regimes—provided the agency heads can, and will, extend
their strategic vision beyond their own tenure. It is no longer sufficient to achieve
change, difficult as it may be. The public-sector leader must learn to consider not
only what can be but what will be, how what is achieved can be sustained. This
requires future-oriented strategic thinking, which I argue must include attention
to succession planning. Succession planning done well involves preparing the
agency for a change in leadership, but it also includes assessing what has been
valuable and how that can be preserved and transferred to the subsequent regime.
It is this strategic, sustaining innovation aspect of succession planning that
I focus on in this article.
First, I shall look at how research on succession in the private sector is both
helpful and hindering for public-sector succession planning, especially in the
realm of sustaining innovation. I will also examine the research that exists in the
public sector and its relevance. I describe a series of constraints or barriers that
must be overcome if succession is to be taken seriously in public-sector organizations.
I present a case study drawn from my experience as Commissioner of the
New York City Department of Juvenile Justice, where I served for seven years
and managed my succession in a way that enabled the innovations that had been
put in place to be retained and further innovations based on these to be created.
I discuss the four interconnected strategies devised to implement this succession
and show how they can help both in overcoming barriers to taking succession
seriously and in shaping the legacy of a public-sector organization.
Succession and Succession Planning: A Brief Review of the Literature
Most articles on succession and succession planning begin with a familiar lament:
executive-level transition merits more attention than it gets in the literature
(Rainey and Wechsler, 1988; Greenblatt, 1983; Gordon and Rosen, 1981; Austin
and Gilmore, 1993). The relatively few authors who address the issue in the context
of the public sector point out the even more serious gap on that side. The
National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA), anticipating significant re-

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
343
tirements in the Federal Senior Executive Service beginning in 1994, began a
serious look at succession planning in the early 1990s (NAPA, 1992). The NAPA
researchers also remarked on the lack of attention to public-sector transitions. In
an article written in 1993, although published later, Farquhar refers to the ‘‘rapidly
expanding’’ literature on succession (Farquhar, 1996), and in 1995, she edited a
special edition of Human Resource Management on the topic of leadership transitions
(Farquhar, 1995).
Both the problem in the public sector and its consequences have been described
by Rainey and Wechsler (1988), who argue, ‘‘Whether one adopts a broad
or more specific approach to organizational performance and productivity, effective
transition management is essential to achieving positive results.’’ At the same
time, the authors characterize executive transitions at all levels of government as
‘‘marked by serious deficiencies in preparation, orientation, and communication’’
(p. 45). However, while noting that some research exists on the political management
of transition at the presidential and gubernatorial levels, the authors do not
make use of the broader literature on transition and executive succession that
would help guide an analysis of transition and change at the agency level—
particularly within, not between, administrations.
Various frameworks help conceptualize transition generally and the issues
that surround it. The most useful begin before the actual succession event (Rainey
and Wechsler, 1988; Greenblatt, 1983; Gordon and Rosen, 1981) and draw attention
to what Rainey and Wechsler call the objective as well as subjective domains.
But there is something missing even here. Greenblatt, for example, begins with
what he terms the ‘‘anticipatory’’ stage but fails to capture the opportunity for a
strategic view of this moment. Gordon and Rosen point out the need to attend to
the time before the new leader arrives, but they still start with the new leader’s
being chosen. Rainey and Wechsler describe transition as a major ‘‘strategy influencing’’
event. This stops short of grasping transition’s full potential to make, not
just influence, strategy. They write as if the departing leader has no role in shaping
the transition.
Although the literature gives some attention to the person leaving (Kets de
Vries, 1988), more is given to the new leader and his or her dilemmas (Gouldner,
1950; Greenblatt, 1983; Gilmore and Ronchi, 1995). In a particularly interesting
article on leadership during interregna, Farquhar (1991) examines 43 Legal Service
Corporations and analyzes the dynamics and impact of interim administrations.
Other research distinguishes the important dimensions in which cases differ,
arguably the most significant being the reason for departure. Not all CEO successions
are equally interesting for theorists. Fredrickson, Hambrick, and Baumrin
(1988) suggest that firings and voluntary departures offer the most meat because
only then are real choices made; their work focuses on dismissals. Austin and
Gilmore (1993) also highlight the importance of the reason for transition. They
outline various reasons and cite previous works on each—retirement, term expiration,
protest, reassignment, illness, or death—but select for case analysis the

344 A PPENDIX II
leader who chooses to move on to a new opportunity. They are especially helpful
in suggesting explicit strategies the departing leader can use to manage the exit
process. On the topic of contemplating one’s successor, Austin and Gilmore
(1993, p. 52) comment, ‘‘It is striking how many executives have known that they
will be leaving within a year or two and have not found a way either to focus on
leadership succession or to expand the talent to help the organization cope with
a change.’’
This is the territory that my article attempts to plumb further: the voluntary
decision to leave, planned and discussed in advance, as opposed to the sudden
and traumatic leaving that Farquhar (1996) has written about and strategically
framed.
Taking Succession Seriously
It is a serious matter that succession planning in the public sector, especially
below the presidential level, has not, until recently, received much attention in
the literature. However, a more critical issue is that it has not received much
attention in the actual world of public service. This omission, in part, reflects the
fact that leaders in the public sector have themselves not taken the issue of succession
planning seriously, except for obvious concerns like elections and mandates.
Doing strategic executive searches in the public sector is difficult, but that
is a secondary factor. What is primary, I suggest, is changing public-sector culture
so that focusing on succession and beyond becomes a hallmark of strategic leadership.
The public-sector executive must begin to consider the end right at the
beginning. The pull to get consumed by the demands of the present is strong but
must be resisted. Creating a picture of what the leader wants to leave behind will
actually help focus strategic choices as well as direct the leader’s attention to
often overlooked strengths of the existing organization.
Public-sector leaders must surmount four types of barriers to taking succession
seriously: (1) The leader’s reluctance to take up the succession ‘‘task’’; (2)
The assumption that succession issues are beyond the scope of the leader’s work;
(3) Confusion about how the succession task should be framed—is it a matter of
replacing oneself or of strategic ‘‘positioning?’’ and (4) Lack of information about
how to take up the task—how to plan for succession in the midst of a shifting
political environment and given regulatory and political constraints.
Reluctance to ‘‘Deal’’ with Succession
In The Hero’s Farewell, a study of 50 prominent, retired, private-sector CEOs,
Jeffrey Sonnenfeld (1988) discusses the ‘‘heroic self-concept of the departing
leader’’ (p. 3) as having a great influence on succession. Part of that self-concept
is a ‘‘sense of heroic mission, a feeling that one has a unique role to fill and that
only the hero is capable of carrying out the responsibilities of the job.’’ Sonnenfeld
describes this attitude as ‘‘a barrier to the hero’s exit’’ (p. 62). The greater the
frustration with the heroic mission, and the more attached to the ‘‘heroic stature’’

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
345
of the office (another aspect of the heroic self-concept), the longer the CEOs
Sonnenfeld studied stayed on the job (p. 69).
Sonnenfeld groups CEO attitudes toward departure into four categories ranging
from complete reluctance to willingness. Monarchs will not leave voluntarily
and either die in office or are overthrown. Generals leave with great reluctance
and then plot comebacks. Ambassadors leave gracefully and maintain amicable
ties to their old organizations. Governors are pleased to serve only a limited time
and then leave to do something else, maintaining little contact with the company.
Monarchs and generals are clearly the most averse to acknowledging that the end
draws nigh, and that factor affects the likelihood of a succession planning process
occurring at all.
Manfred F. R. Kets de Vries (1988) also writes about the reluctance of corporate
CEOs to tackle succession planning. As does Sonnenfeld, he focuses on the
retirement-age CEO in the private sector who has to overcome the ‘‘hidden fears
that plague us all’’ (p. 57) to face stepping down.
Drawing direct parallels between public- and private-sector research on succession
must be done carefully. Because the public sector has more short-term
leaders than institution builders, one must take particular care in using the categories
Sonnenfeld has illuminated. Nevertheless, the public sector has its share
of reluctant-to-leave leaders. Certainly there are generals who believe, against all
evidence, that there is some chance they can survive even an unfriendly transition
of mayor or governor and thus are averse to planning for a succession they do
not want to happen. One also finds monarchs who are so imbued with their
heroic sense of mission that they find it unthinkable that they ever would be
forced to depart, no matter how unreasonable that belief may be. They therefore
resist any attempt to broach the idea of succession, much less the planning for it.
The public sector has more than its fair share of governors, too. They seem
an unlikely group on whom to depend for succession planning. Their investment
in the agency is often minimal, as is the agency’s in them. The hope for planning
must lie with the ambassadors, primarily by encouraging them to enlarge the
scope of their vision to include the task of succession planning.
Assuming That Succession Is Beyond the Scope of the Leader’s Work
Beyond personal reluctance lies the power of the group norm. The public sector
is focused on the here-and-now, and authority is thought to be given, not taken
up.
Both the private and not-for-profit sectors have a clearer focus on the future.
While the American business community is sometimes criticized for attending too
much to the short term, as compared to the Japanese, for example, it is clear that
there are mechanisms and institutionalized roles within the private sector to carry
the perspective of the future: the stockholders and the board of directors, if not
the CEO. Regina Herzlinger (1994) has argued that this focus on the future and
‘‘intergenerational equity’’ is among the most significant responsibilities of the
not-for-profit board. These future-oriented mechanisms and roles are weak or

346 A PPENDIX II
nonexistent in the public sector, certainly at the agency level. Those outside government
often call mayors and governors to task for budget wizardry that risks
future crisis for present peace. If agency heads are held accountable at all, it is
for their management of day-to-day problems, not their investment in the future.
The literature’s lack of attention to accountability for the future both underlines
and reinforces the current situation. As more researchers turn their attention
to this issue, it is possible there may be some shift in the public’s expectations. It
is likely, though, that it will need some greater push than that. Teaching in both
graduate school and executive education programs can have a great impact. Just
as faculty try to set a standard that expects strategic leadership from public-sector
executives and discourages a narrow focus on fighting fires, teachers can extend
their understanding of what it takes to be strategic. Faculty can ‘‘raise the bar’’
and draw a new picture of what excellence in the public sector demands: an
attention to the future as well as to the present.
Confusion About the Succession ‘‘Frame’’
Succession planning, even in the private sector, has all too often been regarded
as a replacement issue, not a strategic responsibility to be shared among the
organization’s stakeholders (National Academy of Public Administration, 1992;
Kets de Vries, 1988). That is, the intent is to replace X by Y, who has similar skills
and training. What is missing is the link between the vacancy, or the forthcoming
vacancy, and the organization’s strategic needs (Gratton and Syrett, 1990)—
particularly those related to preserving the innovations it has achieved. Unprecedented
global competition is forcing companies in the private sector to rethink
succession planning in this strategic light, and those failing to do so are increasingly
being ‘‘punished’’ by either the market or their competition, and usually by
both. I would argue that the need for such strategic thinking is equally acute in
the public sector, albeit motivated by different factors. The approach, however,
seems long in coming. Although some states have moved toward a more strategic
view of executive recruitment, this effort has generally been initiated only after
the leader has resigned or been terminated. 2
Difficulty of Managing Succession in a Turbulent Environment
There are actually two challenges to managing succession: technology and turbulence.
Public-sector leaders have limited access to search technology and search
firms; they may not even understand the steps in a strategic search process. The
literature is thin on the subject and offers few clues about how to proceed. Turbulence
now exists in all three sectors. It is not just in the public sector that strategic
planning must somehow be both short- and long-term. The source of turbulence
differs by sector (competition versus election, for example), but the swirling confused
winds that each produces can make the process more complicated anywhere.
What separates the sectors is their reaction to turbulence.
Public-sector leaders too often allow the turbulence to limit their scope of
action (‘‘there will be a new mayor so I have no control’’), whereas private-sector

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
347
leaders are expected to ‘‘manage’’ the turbulence (‘‘how can we move into this
new market and fast?’’). Elections need not doom the process of executive succession.
If the first three barriers could be overcome and leaders had the will—were
expected to plan for succession and saw it as a strategic task—the technology
could be acquired and the turbulence acknowledged but not succumbed to.
Keeping these barriers in mind, we turn to an example of how a public-sector
succession can be managed successfully and how hard-won innovations can survive
the transition.
Managing a Public-Sector Transition: A Case Study
The New York City Department of Juvenile Justice was created as a separate
executive-branch agency in 1979. I served as its commissioner for seven years,
from 1983 to 1990. During my tenure, the department accomplished two major
goals. We revitalized a bureaucracy that had originally been part of a ‘‘megaagency’’
and had lost all sense of purpose and efficiency before being reincarnated
as a separate department in 1979 (Gilmore and Schall, 1986). We developed
a clear mission and role for juvenile detention. Overall, we created an innovative
organization, and believed that sustaining our innovations and the impetus to
innovate were critically important. 3 The executive staff of the Juvenile Justice
Department had become a team in Katzenbach and Smith’s (1993) sense. We had
moved from being preoccupied with handling an endless supply of short-term
issues toward building the capacity for and the pattern of looking ahead. Crucial
to this focus was creating the notion of case management as a way to make real
our newly defined mission of custody and care and to explore its implications for
the children we served and the staff attending to them. Although I was offered
opportunities to leave the department early on, I determined that two additional
goals had to be reached before I felt ‘‘finished’’ enough to depart. The first involved
institutionalizing our case management program throughout the agency.
The second was receiving final city approval of our plans to replace a much
maligned secure detention facility with two new, smaller, community-based facilities.
By early 1988, these goals were well on their way toward accomplishment,
and I believed the time for new leadership was nearing. I discussed my role
in the transition process with Tom Gilmore, an organizational consultant to the
department and author of Making a Leadership Change (Gilmore, 1988). It is to
his thinking and framework that we owe much of the work that followed, beginning
with a retreat, in the fall of 1988, for the executive staff.
Launching the ‘‘Finishing Up’’ Phase
During this multiday retreat, we began by discussing how our group was currently
faring and what work each unit in the agency would be undertaking in the
next two years. Then, each executive staff member outlined what his or her own
time horizon was likely to be, and how that did or did not dovetail with the
work to be accomplished. In essence, we acknowledged we were launching a

348 A PPENDIX II
‘‘finishing up’’ phase, with all that implied: pride in achievement, exhaustion from
the effort, disappointment about unrealized goals, and full doses of the irritation
and affection built up over the years. I announced my intention to leave at this
time but did not actually leave for 18 months.
We then turned to issues of both legacy and succession: legacy to ensure that
our innovations would survive and succession as a major strategy. As to succession,
we determined that we preferred someone from our own ranks. By the end
of the retreat, not only had we ‘‘chosen’’ our candidate, the assistant commissioner
for secure detention, she had begun to see herself as a possible successor.
But how could we ensure that our legacy would be preserved? We invented four
questions for ourselves, which we attempted to address simultaneously during
the retreat and for the next year and more. We saw these challenges, in fact, as a
set of Russian dolls, each nested in another:
▲ How could we get our candidate appointed as the next commissioner of
the Juvenile Justice Department?
▲ If this failed, how could we get someone else who would continue our
innovations and our vision?
▲ If this too failed, and a nonsupporter was appointed, how could we keep
successful innovations alive?
▲ If all else failed, could we leave a ‘‘treasure map’’ so a future supportive
commissioner could rediscover what we had done?
We tackled these questions simultaneously by scenario-playing, by anticipating
pitfalls, and by creating alternative paths—what Bardach (1977) calls the work of
‘‘dirty-minded implementors.’’ Our strategies are discussed below in reverse
order from the list of questions.
Designing a Treasure Map
The idea was, if all else had failed, to provide the next supportive commissioner
with a series of clues about our efforts—our treasures. We decided, for example,
to leave behind the following:
▲ Traces of each of our innovative programs, rather than cutting any one (in
the face of significant budget cuts) to spare the rest
▲ At least one staff person for each program so it could be fairly easily resurrected
▲ A good written record in files and public documents about our accomplishments
▲ Champions for each major initiative
More generally, we knew we were leaving behind a staff imbued with a vision of
innovation and excellence.

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
349
Our support and acknowledgment of the staff’s good work had been a hallmark
of our administration, and we counted on their enhanced capacity to carry
forward much of the innovation.
We were not naive enough to believe that, if discovered, our treasures would
get resurrected under the same names and exactly in the same way. That was not
the goal. We were not looking for eternal life; rather, we hoped that the clues
might somehow provoke new ideas to sustain our momentum and direction.
Keeping Successful Innovations Alive
The two new tactics we pursued were preparing people and ‘‘hardwiring’’ the
system. We also took advantage of previous strategic decisions to help preserve
our legacy of innovative programs.
Preparing People
By early 1989 the executive staff began identifying talent at the next level down
within each unit. Determining the criteria for such identification was not a simple
matter, however, and provoked heated debates about overall skills, vision,
agency mission, managerial ability, and other factors. Nevertheless, we compiled
a list of about 30 people and then assessed each person’s strengths and weaknesses
and the likelihood of the individual’s staying on with the agency. We
specified what each needed for professional development and began connecting
her or him with appropriate opportunities—pledging that we would watch out
for each other’s staff and help them along the way. From this review, for example,
we drew upon the talent of a staff assistant with the potential of developing
managerial capacity and targeted a heretofore overlooked senior operational
manager for more cross-agency work and exposure to the overall system. As we
grew to understand who would be leaving, we discussed who could be groomed
to take over.
Compiling this list helped immensely in focusing our training resources. As
we learned of various city-wide programs, for example, we referred to our list so
people on it could be offered these opportunities.
Hardwiring
Some things in organizations have a life of their own; they go on against almost
all efforts to change them. At the Juvenile Justice Department those things included
the forms used to process kids. I remember two years into my tenure
finding forms in use that predated the 1979 creation of the department as a separate
agency. This infuriated me then. Later, it intrigued me. What about those
forms made them survive despite our efforts to create new systems? They seemed
almost like permanent fixtures of the agency; they were hardwired. In a deliberate
effort to create an equivalent method with equal sticking power, we turned
our attention to what we hoped might be our version of those old forms: the
department’s newly developed case-management computer-tracking system. We
put a great deal of energy into moving that ahead. We believed that if a system

350 A PPENDIX II
was in place, hardwired, which in effect systematized the case management of
individual children and reported data, it would carry a great deal of weight. We
knew that weight could easily become inertia: it would take an effort of significant
proportion to shift away from it.
Our focus on hardwiring also extended to the department’s external relationships,
particularly in the realm of oversight. ‘‘Blessed’’ with multiple agencies
overseeing our work, we figured that if they became accustomed to receiving
certain data, reported in certain ways, they would be likely to request that information
and format subsequently and exert some pressure toward our case management
approach and system to receive it.
Strategic Decisions
Earlier, we had decided to run a community-based aftercare program ourselves
rather than contract it out; doing so involved tremendous effort, including establishing
new civil service positions. We felt that in an (inevitable) financial crisis,
it would be easier for the city to cancel contracts than to authorize layoffs, and
we were right. We experienced successive rounds of budget cuts but were able
to hold on to at least a core of staff. Also, our intensive home-based program,
Family Ties, an alternative to costly state placement, was positioned as a revenueenhancer:
each staff person should not be charged to our budget as a cost, we
insisted, but instead counted as saving the state and city together $70,000 per
child placed with Family Ties. As a result, the Juvenile Justice Department actually
added positions in the program when the overall budget was cut.
Finding a Successor Who Would Continue Our Efforts
Because New York City was facing a mayoral campaign (between David Dinkins
and Rudolph Giuliani) as we were devising our legacy and succession strategies,
we designed scenarios for each candidate based on whom he might want as
commissioner of the Juvenile Justice Department. We brainstormed a range of
issues including values, ethnicity, and gender and considered people fitting various
profiles. We wanted to be able to present a list of real candidates if someone
asked—and to present that list even if no one did. We then went on to think
about who would likely be influential in the new mayor’s decision-making process
and whether we knew them or knew someone who did.
Getting Our Candidate Appointed
David Dinkins was elected, and his approach to appointing commissioners was
decentralized, bordering on the chaotic. Committees named for each agency
were asked to interview candidates and make recommendations to the mayor. I
knew the person chairing the Juvenile Justice group and talked with her directly.
Along with others, our candidate was interviewed; she was recommended and
ultimately selected to be the new commissioner.

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
351
Managing the Feelings
Although the decision to leave the Department of Juvenile Justice was strictly my
own, and I strongly attempted to ensure that the transition was smooth, the process
was hardly easy. Indeed, years after, when I began writing this article, I
thought that I had announced my intention to leave six months prior to my departure—only
after checking notes did I realize it actually had been 18 months. This
confusion reflects the difficulties involved. There were issues of authority, over
hiring, for example, and the natural tension each of us felt between being ready
to move on and reluctant to leave. Managing one’s own succession is not a simple
affair, which is why, in the public and private sector, the issue of succession itself
and the process of seeking a successor are so often badly handled.
Yet I believe that when a team has invested as much as we had in creating
and innovating organization, the work is unfinished if you have not attempted to
think strategically about its continuation. Today, the department’s case-management
system and the Aftercare and Family Ties programs are all in place, although
reduced by budget cuts. While my successor remained committed to the agenda
we had developed together, she took the agency in new directions with a focus
on prevention. She remained at Juvenile Justice for four years and her successor
has worked hard to keep the basic programs in place and move the agency
forward.
Moving Forward
How can we persuade public-sector leaders to take up the task of succession?
Sector does not matter when it comes to the leader’s dark side; the wish to believe
in one’s own immortality and to stay in control (Kets de Vries, 1988) can be
found in leaders across sectors. Although leaders in all sectors confront relentless
demands on their time and energies, private-sector cultures work more powerfully
to stress the need to plan ahead. We will have to cultivate that emphasis in
the public sector if we seek it. We can begin by searching for stories or case
examples of successful and strategic public-sector transitions. We can attempt to
set the expectation through education, solidify it through public attention, and
seek to attract ambassadors to the work of the public sector.
This is not the easiest of times to build a focus on the long term, however.
There is a serious disconnect between the demands on, and expectations of,
public-sector leaders and their lengths of stay. Perhaps the ‘‘connect’’ is all too
clear: as citizens we ask a lot, offer little in terms of understanding and support
(let alone compensation), blame easily, and reward infrequently. In any event,
the average tenure of public-sector agency heads is less than two years. Given
the impact of such a brief tenure on expected results, advice is being offered
about how to shorten the learning curve or reach full speed more quickly. These
observations, while well intentioned, seem inevitably to fall short. Public-sector
leaders need to stay longer and focus more on the future to ensure the quality of
government we need.
Democracies offer citizens an opportunity, through elections, to signal their

352 A PPENDIX II
preferences, and elected officials have the right to create new directions and
change course. Yet both citizens and elected officials must avoid ‘‘change for
change’s sake.’’ Not only can that attitude slide all too easily into simple-minded
government-bashing, with the public increasingly losing respect for any government
programs and any government worker; it also severely constrains government’s
capacity to go forward and build on the best of its efforts—in other words,
its capacity to sustain innovation.
Both the public and those in the government need to learn to honor the past
and build upon it. We must begin creating the expectation that the public sector
can, and should, focus on the longer term. As I have suggested in this article,
senior officials, whether elected or appointed, must not only think strategically
during their tenure but also be oriented beyond their tenure. Developing the
willingness and ability to devise an effective approach to succession planning is
a crucial step in that process.
Acknowledgment
The author wishes to thank Bob Behn and the participants in the 1994 Duke
University Faculty Seminar on Organizational Innovation in State and Local Government,
sponsored by the Ford Foundation, for their reactions and assistance in
working through issues of public-sector succession. Katherine Farquhar demonstrated
extraordinary generosity in offering a thorough and thoughtful critique of
an earlier version of this article. The comments of the anonymous reviewers are
also very much appreciated. Finally, Tom Gilmore’s earlier assistance and continuous
support deserve acknowledgment here.
Notes
1. See Yin ( 1979) for an early discussion of the routinization of innovations.
2. In the early 1980s, the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation funded what
was then the executive search firm of Isaacson, Ford, Webb to be available to
governors looking for new commissioners of correction. And the National Governors
Association, with funding from the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation,
began a State Health Recruitment Center in the early 1990s that lasted no more
than two years. Individual governors and mayors have turned to search firms
from time to time, but most rely on a narrow pool of people they know.
3. The Department of Juvenile Justice won the Ford Foundation/Kennedy
School of Government Innovation Award in State and Local Government in 1986,
the first year of the awards program, for its case-management program for at-risk
youth. The department was also recognized in the Public Broadcasting System
documentary, ‘‘Excellence in the Public Sector with Tom Peters.’’ Additional program
innovations included creating an Aftercare Program and adapting Home
Builders to the juvenile justice system in a program we called Family Ties.
References
Austin, Michael J. and Thomas N. Gilmore. 1993. ‘‘Executive Exit: Multiple Perspectives
on Managing the Leadership Transition.‘‘ Administration in Social
Work, vol. 17 (1): 47–60.

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
353
Bardach, Eugene.1977. The Implementation Game: What Happens After a Bill
Becomes a Law. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Farquhar, Katherine. 1991. ‘‘Leadership in Limbo: Organization Dynamics During
Interim Administrations.’’ Public Administration Review, vol. 51 (3): 210.
Farquhar, Katherine. 1996. ‘‘A Tough Act to Follow: Traumatic Executive Departure
and the Post-Transformational Context.’’ International Journal of Public
Administration, December.
Farquhar, Katherine, guest editor. 1995. Human Resource Management, vol. 34
(spring).
Fredrickson, James W., Donald C. Hambrick, and Sara Baumrin. 1988. ‘‘A Model
of CEO Dismissal.‘‘ Academy of Management Review, vol. 13 (2): 255–270.
Gilmore, Thomas N. and Don Ronchi. 1995. ‘‘Managing Predecessors’ Shadows
in Executive Transitions.’’ Human Resource Management, vol. 34 (1): ll-26.
Gilmore, Thomas N. 1988. Making a Leadership Change: How Organizations
and Leaders Can Handle Leadership Transitions Successfully. San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass.
Gilmore, Thomas N. and Ellen Schall. 1986. ‘‘The Use of Case Management as a
Revitalizing Theme in a Juvenile Justice Agency.‘‘ Public Administration Review,
vol. 46 (3): 267–274.
Gordon, Gil E. and Ned Rosen, 1981. ‘‘Critical Factors in Leadership Succession.’’
Organizational Behavior and Human Performance, vol. 27, 227–254.
Gouldner, Alvin W. 1950. ‘‘The Problem of Succession and Bureaucracy.’’ In
A. W. Gouldner, ed., Studies in Leadership. New York: Harper & Brothers,
pp. 644–662.
Gratton, Lynda and Michel Syrett. 1990. ‘‘Heirs Apparent: Succession Strategies
for the Future.’’ Personnel Management, January, pp. 34–38.
Greenblatt, Milton. 1983. ‘‘Management Succession: Some Major Parameters.’’
Human Science Press.
Herzlinger, Regina. 1994. ‘‘Effective Oversight: A Guide for Non profit Directors.’’
Harvard Business Review, July-August, pp. 52–60.
Katzenbach, Jon R. and Douglas K Smith. 1993. The Wisdom of Teams: Creating
the High Performance Organization. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.
Kets de Vries, Manfred F. R. 1988. ‘‘The Dark Side of CEO Succession.’’ Harvard
Business Review, vol. 88 (1): 56–60.
National Academy of Public Administration. 1992. Paths to Leadership: Executive
Succession Planning in the Federal Government. Washington, D.C.: National
Academy of Public Administration.
Rainey, Hal G. and Barton Wechsler. 1988. ‘‘Executive-Level Transition: Toward
a Conceptual Framework.‘‘ Public Productivity Review, vol. 13 (1).
Rainey, Hal G. and Barton Wechsler. 1992. ‘‘Study of Succession Planning and
Executive Selection: Preliminary Research Results.’’ Literature Review and
Annotated Bibliography, June.
Sonnenfeld, Jeffrey A. 1988. The Hero’s Farewell: What Happens When CEO’s
Retire. New York: Oxford University Press.

354 A PPENDIX II
Yin, Robert K. 1979. Changing Urban Bureaucracies: How New Practices Become
Routinized. Lexington, MA: Lexington Books.
Case 3: How a Nonprofit Organization Plans for Succession:
Next in Line
Elaine’s Perspective
When my husband retired, I realized that the day was approaching when I would
no longer work for the Greensboro Regional Realtors Association (GRRA). Having
worked diligently to turn the association into a good-to-great organization—a
Jim Collins concept explored in his book by the same name (2001, HarperCollins)—I
made a deliberate decision that given the opportunity I would help the
association continue on its path to excellence no matter who led the organization.
In the fall of 2000, I contacted the incoming board president and presidentelect
to discuss my decision to leave the association at the end of 2002. I informed
them that I had identified one employee as my potential successor—Michael
Barr, GRRA’s chief operating officer. Having worked closely with Michael for a
little more than a year, I saw in him several qualities that exemplified leadership:
▲ Humility
▲ A professional willingness to do what had to be done
▲ The willingness to channel energy into the association rather than into
himself
▲ The ability to credit staff and volunteers, when appropriate
▲ A desire to develop both personally and professionally
Based on my recommendation to consider an internal candidate for my position,
the incoming president and president-elect both felt that a succession plan was
in order. The next decision was whether I or a consultant should put the plan
together.
Shortly after my conversation with the president and president-elect, the full
executive committee met and decided that I should create the succession plan.
The committee believed that my knowledge of the association, its mission, and
its needs—as well as my 10 years in its top staff position—gave me the insight
required to create a thorough plan. Additionally, the committee expressed complete
trust in me and my ability to not compromise the association. In total, the
committee felt that a solid management plan for succession would be an important
part of the association’s efforts to develop talent, meet organizational needs,
and improve the association’s overall results on behalf of members.
Using my job description, a list of things that I did that were not in my official
Source: Elaine H. Ernest and Michael P. Barr, ‘‘Next in Line,’’ Association Management, 55:10
(2003), 42. Used with permission of Association Management.

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
355
job description, knowledge gained from scanning literature on CEO skill sets,
and my understanding of the association’s strategic plan, I drafted a work plan
that defined the responsibilities and challenges of the executive position and
outlined the areas in which I would coach and mentor Michael. It was early March
2001 when I submitted this draft succession plan to the executive committee. The
committee accepted the plan in mid-March, and Michael and I began discussions
about his long-range career plans. I asked him questions such as:
▲ Are you interested in obtaining the Certified Association Executive (CAE)
designation?
▲ Are you interested in expanding your responsibilities in the association
and the community?
▲ Are you willing to travel with me to additional professional development
seminars?
▲ Are you willing to work with me as your mentor for an opportunity to
become a CEO? (No promises were made, of course.)
His affirmative answers noted, we started working through the actual plan outline.
Because Michael was COO, all staff reported to him. To free up time for
him to work through the succession plan, we diverted some of his day-to-day
responsibilities to other staff members. Job descriptions for senior managers were
reworked to lessen Michael’s workload. To explain this shift in activities, we
informed staff that the executive committee wanted Michael to be more involved
with the overall operations and mission of the association. While this was true,
we did not apprise staff that Michael was being groomed as my potential replacement.
For the next 15 months, Michael and I spent a few hours each week reviewing
the plan, setting priorities for the next month, making adjustments when necessary,
and reporting to the executive committee on a quarterly basis. The committee
left the decisions of progress, needed training, and adjustments to me, with
input from Michael.
Here are a few things that I learned from this experience.
1. Every CEO is capable of doing succession planning if he or she cares about
the organization.
2. Succession planning is not an easy task. Little research is available about
it, especially for the not-for-profit sector.
3. Succession planning is an excellent way to assess the organization, look
at trends, peek at what is coming down the road, and realize your
strengths and weaknesses as an executive.
Working through this plan with leadership and another high-level manager,
it was easy to see what habits made the association successful and what areas

356 A PPENDIX II
needed more attention. It also solidified the organization’s core values and made
it clear what was important to continue.
Michael’s Perspective
After I agreed to and signed the work plan outline, I really got busy. I’d like to
say the task ahead of me looked simple, but it didn’t. At times I felt as though I
was pledging a fraternity all over again. However, Elaine was a wonderful coach
and mentor. Whether this adventure would turn out as suggested was anyone’s
guess. My focus was on learning as much as I could about association management,
qualifying to sit for and passing the CAE exam, accomplishing the items
detailed in the work plan, building a network of colleagues, and enjoying the
experience. The plan was specific and intense. It outlined nine major components
of the executive position and specified several competencies in each area.
Following are the components of the work plan and some of my prominent
accomplishments in each area.
Essential Management Responsibilities
This area included nine components such as financial oversight, office administration,
and understanding the parallel structures of the association. Accomplishments:
▲ Worked with and advised association volunteer groups, task forces, committees,
directors, officers, and presidents.
▲ Supervised staff; evaluated job descriptions, performance, salary administration,
and work processes to provide high-quality and efficient services
to the membership.
▲ Developed a three-year budget model and new reports for the board of
directors on nondues revenue sources.
▲ Developed a new member benefits program that included affiliating with
a local credit union and offering members discounts on local products and
services.
Essential Administrative Responsibilities
This component was primarily composed of human resources management issues
such as employee performance, oversight of employee benefits plans, and
compensation planning. Accomplishments:
▲ Coordinated employee searches that included position marketing, resume
evaluations, telephone and on-site interviews, compensation negotiations,
and follow-up correspondence.
▲ Researched and presented a new 401(k) retirement program and an employee
education assistance program, which the board approved.

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
357
Research and Statistics
Among other things, this area dealt with member demographics, trends in the
profession, and industry demographics. Accomplishments:
▲ Collaborated with a local university economist to provide our membership
with local and regional market reports.
▲ Collaborated with a local university professor to produce an unbiased survey
for the association membership.
Information Technology
This area included competencies such as keeping members up to date with industry
technology trends and continual analysis and implementation of the membership’s
technology needs. Accomplishments:
▲ Developed and implemented a technology infrastructure plan that included
replacing the phone system, upgrading computer software, and
adapting wireless technology.
▲ Developed a new Web site that allows the membership to pay association
bills online and provides segmented information according to members’
preferences.
▲ Provided the membership with various technology-training opportunities,
which had been requested through membership surveys.
Facilities Management
This area covered everything from the HVAC system to aesthetics and landscaping.
Accomplishments:
▲ Managed and supervised the association’s banquet facility renovations and
grounds beautification.
▲ Managed and supervised the association’s building maintenance contractors
and banquet facility operations.
Strategic Planning
True competency in this area was defined by the ability to keep staff focused on
the vision of the association, continually evaluate the association’s operations,
and commit and adhere to the strategic objective of the organization. Accomplishments:
▲ Participated in the research and preparation of the strategic planning
board retreat, including negotiating with consultants, preparatory work
with consultants, and execution of retreat, followed by the development
and yearly refinement of the plan.
▲ Focused staff on association priorities to accomplish the strategic goals of
the association within the set timeline.

358 A PPENDIX II
Internal and External Relations
Government affairs, coalition building, and public relations were the bedrocks of
this component. Accomplishments:
▲ Attended local, state, and National Realtor Association board of director
meetings.
▲ Represented the association at the Triad Real Estate and Building Industry
Coalition and at other regional coalitions.
▲ Continually represented the association at community events, local government
meetings, and association events.
▲ Networked with the leaders of the local and state associations.
Continuing Education
One of the key thrusts of this area was attaining the CAE designation, showing a
commitment to association management, and continual learning. Accomplishments:
▲ Attended numerous coaching and training seminars offered by ASAE, the
National Association of Realtors, the North Carolina Association of Realtors,
and GRRA on various subjects.
▲ Earned my CAE designation.
General Working Knowledge
The final component focused on understanding industry-specific processes, our
bylaws, and the financial aspects of the association. Accomplishments:
▲ Trained to administer the association’s professional standards and arbitration
process.
▲ Studied and enforced multiple listing service rules and regulations and
association bylaws and rules and regulations.
▲ Acted as chapter administrator for 360-member North Carolina Certified
Commercial Investment Members, which the association manages.
After working through each component of the succession plan, I submitted a
letter to the executive committee expressing my interest in the CEO position. At
this point it was May 2002, and I was able to include a detailed description of
how I had accomplished the work set out in the plan.
Coming to the Conclusion
A month later, the full board of directors met. The president informed the directors
that Elaine was leaving her position as CEO of GRRA at year’s end. Copies of
the completed work plan and Michael’s letter of interest were distributed. Discus-

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
359
sion ensued about the succession process and whether the job opening should
be taken outside the organization.
A minority of board members felt that if Michael were truly qualified, he
would win out in an extensive search. The majority of the directors, however, felt
comfortable that the plan was comprehensive and that the executive committee
had been sufficiently involved through its receipt of progress reports. An open
search, in their opinion, would cost the association time and money. After taking
a vote, the executive committee was granted permission to interview Michael for
the position. If the committee was not satisfied with the interview, the search
would be opened, and a selection committee appointed.
‘‘Ten of eleven good-to-great CEOs came from inside the company,’’ says Jim
Collins in his book Good to Great. The Greensboro Regional Realtors Association
found that to be the case after Michael’s successful interview for the chief staff
executive position. In mid-July 2002, more than a year after the draft succession
plan was submitted, GRRA’s board president started contract negotiations for the
association’s new president. Michael took over the top spot on January 1, 2003.
Mentoring Magic
Since Michael P. Barr, CAE, took over as executive vice president of the Greensboro
Regional Realtors Association, North Carolina, in January, he has started his
own mentoring program with senior staff. Read what he has to say on the subject.
Association Management: Why did you start the program?
Michael P. Barr, CAE: Being a product of mentoring, I saw the value in developing
staff to their fullest and helping them with their career goals. Essentially
that’s what Elaine did for me. It’s a win-win for both the association and the
employees.
Association Management: What’s involved?
Barr: I meet regularly with staff. We consistently go over both their work
goals and professional goals. It’s individualized according to their preferences,
because we’re trying to help them achieve their professional best. I take them to
conferences, send them to workshops, and help them achieve the designation of
their choosing. Basically, I go over their goals and objectives and help them get
the education they need to obtain their goals. The board thinks that this is so
important that it has increased the budget line item for staff development.
Association Management: Who can participate?
Barr: It’s open to anyone who has expressed an interest in association management.
Obviously, it has to be tied to the job. Senior staff is really taking advantage
of it.
Association Management: How’s it been received so far?
Barr: I have full participation. Those who have expressed an interest in learning
what the top job entails, what running an association entails, are really receptive
to learning. Empowering them to take on projects and responsibility has
been a big plus in the operation of the association.
Association Management: What advice would you give to staffers?

360 A PPENDIX II
Barr: Approach mentoring with the best attitude possible. It’s a win no matter
what happens. You’re going to do a lot of extra work, but it’s good preparation
for executive-level positions. Get ready for long hours.
Resources
Articles
‘‘Executive Selection: A Systematic, Team-Based Approach,’’ Executive IdeaLink,
July 2001.
‘‘What If You Were Gone,’’ Association Management, August 2000.
‘‘Mentoring: A Tool for Learning and Development,’’ Association Educator, October
1999.
Books
Knowdell, Richard L. Building a Career Development Program: Nine Steps for
Effective Implementation. Consulting Psychologists Press, 1996.
Rothwell, William J. Effective Succession Planning: Ensuring Leadership Continuity
and Building Talent From Within. AMACOM, 2000.
Byham, William C., Audrey B. Smith, and Matthew J. Paese. Grow Your Own
Leaders: How to Identify, Develop, and Retain Leadership Talent. Financial
Times, Prentice-Hall, 2002.
Wolfe, Rebecca Luhn. Systematic Succession Planning: Building Leadership
From Within. 1996, Crisp Publications, 1996.
Web Site
Succession Planning Library (www.managementhelp.org/staffing /planning/sccs_
pln/sccs_pln.htm)
Case 4: Small Business Case:
Passing the Torch
Jim Gibney, president of Warren Pike Associates, says he grew up in the business.
‘‘I was always drawn to mechanical things,’’ says Gibney, whose family-owned
power transmission and motion control business is headquartered in Needham,
Massachusetts ‘‘As a child, I became interested in the business. During the school
vacations, I would go in to the business and help out. There I got to learn from
one of the best salesmen there is, my father.’’
Gibney characterizes his father as a master salesman and as a leader. He
recounts his father’s career at Warner Electric before purchasing Warren Pike
Associates followed by the purchases of W.M. Steele Co. and Cohen Machinery
Co. to form J.G. Industries, Inc. Gibney says his siblings were drawn to other
interests and have pursued other successful careers, but that he followed his
Source: Richard Trombly, ‘‘Passing the Torch,’’ Industrial Distribution, 90:4(2001), 69–72. Used
with permission from Industrial Distribution.

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
361
father’s footsteps from the beginning. He says that wasn’t always a simple path.
‘‘My father was a hard worker and that was one of the values he instilled in me,’’
says Gibney. ‘‘I worked my way up through the ranks. I’ve been in shipping and
receiving, inside sales and outside sales before taking on a role in management.’’
His father still remains active in the company and retains the title of CEO, but
after years of working hard for the company, he is able to work on something
else—his golf game down in Florida. Meanwhile, Gibney has taken on the role
of president.
‘‘It was an easy transition,’’ says Gibney. ‘‘I have been in upper management
for so long and was already very familiar with the business. My siblings had never
been involved with the business, so they weren’t concerned with the process of
succession. My father and I had discussed it over the years and we knew I would
take over when the time was right.’’ Gibney said they did very little in the way of
formal succession planning.
‘‘After some internal planning and adjustments,’’ says Gibney, ‘‘we realized
that the end of year 2000 would be the right time.’’
Gibney admits that part of the success of the transition relies upon keeping
open channels of communication. While nothing was formalized in their planning,
the details of succession were discussed and understood by all parties,
including JG Industries’ 17 employees. ‘‘Communication is key,’’ says Gibney.
‘‘We have a family atmosphere and we involve the employees in the business.
People usually resist change and that can make succession difficult, but we involved
them in the process. I think, by being included in this way, they are now
excited by new opportunities in a rapidly changing industry.’’
Will his own children take over the family business? Gibney says his children
are between the ages of seven and 13, so it is a little too soon to tell if they will
be involved. ‘‘Perhaps, down the road,’’ speculates Gibney.
Not all children grow into their parents’ roles and not all successions occur
so simply and with such positive results, points out Robert Middleton, a partner
with the Chicago law firm of Nisen & Elliot.
‘‘In most cases there are some hard truths,’’ says Middleton. ‘‘Many entrepreneurs
spend their entire lives sacrificing time and energy only to have the whole
organization fall apart and maybe tear the family apart in the process.’’
Marc Silverman, president of Providence, Rhode Island-based consulting firm
Strategic Initiatives Inc., says that when he counsels a family business, the first
thing is to try to separate the family from the business.
‘‘Then we can decide what we want for the family and what we want for the
business,’’ says Silverman. ‘‘By looking at the family and the business, we can
determine what they both need to be successful.’’
Silverman advises a team approach by getting all of the family involved. He
suggests a family council to assist in planning for the business’s future and in
choosing a leader that will be best suited to the business—as well as resolving
issues of the siblings that are not groomed for succession.
Outsiders can be an enormous amount of help, says Silverman, though he

362 A PPENDIX II
admits that can be difficult for entrepreneurs who are used to doing things in an
autocratic style. It is hard to be objective and many of these issues are closely tied
to the psychological issues of aging. He suggests bringing in a consultant early in
the process if any obstacles develop.
‘‘It is like tooth decay,’’ says Silverman. ‘‘The problem gets bigger the longer
you wait.’’ Jefferey Gallant, a partner with Goodkind, Labaton, Rudoff & Sucharow,
also suggests that businesses have an advisory board. It may be made
up of family members, management, or outside professionals. Gallant says a
board can decide on the important issues of who should lead and what their
services are worth.
Gallant says he is usually brought in for estate planning and has to bring up
the topic of succession. He helps decide what makes the most sense as far as tax
options and retirement, as well as for the business.
‘‘The next step is to get all the parties involved to buy in to it,’’ says Gallant.
‘‘It is so much easier when the owner is involved rather than handling these
issues as part of an estate.’’
Case 5: Family Business Succession:
The Seeds of a Smooth Transition
A month before Christmas, the garden center at Shiloh Nurseries Inc. in Emigsville,
Pennsylvania, looks like a scene from a Norman Rockwell painting, with
decorations and holiday greens at every door and window. Along the path leading
to the side entrance, flowering cabbages are in full bloom.
Inside, Michael Stebbins, 47, is busy getting ready for a Christmas selling
season that will be short because of the late arrival of Thanksgiving. After 27
years as co-owner of the nursery and landscaping business with his partner, Carl
Jacobs, Stebbins knows exactly how he wants everything to look.
He also knows exactly what he wants to happen to the company when he
and Jacobs retire. Both want Shiloh Nurseries to remain a thriving business.
That almost didn’t happen for the family that owned the company before
them. When its founder died with no estate plan, his wife and son discovered
they were unable to work together. The son left to form his own nursery business,
taking many of Shiloh’s employees with him, and his mother was forced to
sell the firm, which was tallying a modest $55,000 in annual sales. Today, Stebbins
and Jacobs employ 25 full-time workers and about 40 more seasonal employees,
and they expect to post sales of about $3 million this year.
The two owners have six children between them but none who wants to take
over the business—they’ve had their fill of nursery life during high school and
summers home from college. Nonetheless, Stebbins and Jacobs do have two
longtime, highly valued employees—their top salesman and landscape architect,
Source: ‘‘The Seeds of a Smooth Transition,’’ Nation’s Business, 85:4 (1997), 25. Used with permission
from Nation’s Business.

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
363
and their landscape supervisor—who would like to run a nursery and landscaping
business someday.
Stebbins and Jacobs liked the idea of them running Shiloh, so they set up a
buy/sell agreement with the pair under which the two employees will begin to
buy the company over two consecutive five-year periods. Each employee will
purchase 12 percent of the company’s stock during the first five years and another
12 percent during the second, at a fixed price of two times book value (with book
value being recalculated annually). Payments will be made on an installment plan
bearing interest at the prime rate plus 1.5 percent.
After 10 years, the four principals will decide how to proceed. Jacobs, now
53, is likely to retire then, but Stebbins hasn’t decided what he will do. Possible
options include having the two employees purchase the remaining 52 percent of
the company at that time or allowing a small number of other key employees to
purchase some of that stock.
Either way, Stebbins and Jacobs are glad that the salesman and the landscape
supervisor are becoming part owners, because they will be positioned to take
over the business when necessary. Shiloh has taken out life-insurance policies
on each of the four shareholding partners; the insurance is in amounts sufficient
to ensure that if any of the partners dies before the buy/sell agreement is completed,
the other partners will be able to meet their obligations under the agreement.
To come up with their plan, Stebbins and Jacobs drew on the advice of an
estate-planning firm, Estate Archetypes Inc., in nearby York, Pennsylvania., and
on Gordon Porter, a CPA and small-business consultant in Dover, Pennsylvania.,
before approaching their lawyer to draft the necessary documents.
‘‘One of the reasons I’m inclined to be so sure we’re doing things right is
because I’m proud of the fact that we took a small business and grew it successfully,’’
Stebbins says. ‘‘This is the company’s 60th-anniversary year, and I’d like to
see it be here for another 60 years.’’
Case 6: CEO Succession Planning Case:
Do You Have a CEO Succession Plan?
Jim Lumpkin’s first move as interim chief executive officer (CEO) for U.S.–
Agencies Credit Union was to eliminate the position he’d just vacated. ‘‘The credit
union was top heavy,’’ recalls Lumpkin, CEO of the Portland, Oregon, credit
union. ‘‘At the time, we were spending too much money on management positions.
We needed a CEO who could handle both jobs.’’
Then he insisted that the board undertake a detailed search, both inside and
outside the credit union, for CEO candidates. ‘‘Our last CEO felt he was named
by default. The board never did a full search so there never was that buy-in that
Source: Bill Merrick, ‘‘Do You Have a CEO Succession Plan?,’’ Credit Union Magazine 67:7 (2001),
52. Used with permission from Credit Union Magazine.

364 A PPENDIX II
they had the right person,’’ Lumpkin explains. ‘‘I stipulated that I wouldn’t apply
for the job unless the board went through a full search process and really looked
for who they wanted. That way there wouldn’t be any second-guessing.’’
The board named Lumpkin CEO after a five-month search, and he has served
in that capacity for four years. But watching the board struggle through the process
made him recognize the need for a detailed succession plan outlining steps
the board should take in case of CEO turnover—whether by resignation, termination,
or death.
The credit union’s recently completed succession plan details planning and
preparation, general board guidelines, steps for emergency succession (broken
down by the first day, week, and month), recruiting and hiring, desired qualifications
and attributes, and other information. ‘‘We’re a smaller company and we
look at our CEO as more of an operational CEO,’’ Lumpkin notes. ‘‘So the CEO
needs to know which areas he or she would be responsible for—accounting,
asset/liability management, compliance issues, examination processes, human
resource administration, and investments. If the CEO leaves, board members
might wonder who else will leave and how they’ll run the credit union. I wanted
to identify skill sets and experiences they should look for.’’
Among other information, the plan lists nine basic steps for CEO replacement:
1. The board hopes for 90 to 120 days’ notice of intent to leave so it can have
an orderly transition. The board would like to hire the new CEO at least
30 days before the departure of the current CEO. It would be preferable
to allow 60 days for this transition.
2. The board will appoint a search committee to monitor the plan and recommend
final candidates to the full board. The board’s executive committee
will make up the search committee in part or in whole. It’s recommended
that the committee consist of three to five individuals. It’s advisable that
the current CEO not be a member of the search committee.
3. The board will decide whether the search committee will conduct the full
search process or whether to use an outside consulting firm. If the board
hires an outside firm, determine the company’s responsibilities and cost,
and specify details in a signed, written contract. Use a firm that’s familiar
with credit union needs and philosophy.
4. The executive committee, with the assistance of the interim CEO and management
team, will update the existing CEO job description, organizational
chart, and other information, and provide it to the search committee
and/or consulting firm.
5. Advertising for the CEO position will appear in local and industry trade
publications.
6. All resumes will be reviewed for basic qualities and experience. Interviews
will be limited to three to five candidates. The search committee or consulting
firm will present the best candidate to the board. If the board

Case Studies on Succession Planning and Management
365
doesn’t accept this candidate, the search committee or consulting firm will
present the second choice.
7. Verification of candidate credentials and employability may include, but
isn’t limited to, educational transcripts, reference checks, credit bureau
reports, CUMIS bond check, medical assessment as allowed by law, psychological
appraisal, and chemical dependency testing.
8. Notification of the new CEO will be provided to the Oregon Department
of Consumer and Business Services, National Credit Union Administration,
Credit Union Association of Oregon, CUMIS Insurance Group, and credit
union attorneys.
9. Publish articles in the quarterly newsletter to announce the current CEO’s
departure and introduce the new CEO.
‘‘Having a plan makes the board and our state regulator feel better,’’ Lumpkin
says. ‘‘Also, staff knows that if something happens, the board will find a match
that will fit members’ needs, internal staffing needs, and the credit union’s culture.
It builds confidence throughout the credit union and reduces uncertainty.’’

This page intentionally left blank

NOTES
Preface
1. Warren Bennis and Burt Nanus, Leaders: The Strategies for Taking
Charge (New York: Harper and Row, 1985), p. 2.
2. Bradley Agle, ‘‘Understanding Research on Values in Business,’’ Business
& Society, September 1999, 326–387. See also Ken Hultman and Bill
Gellerman, Balancing Individual and Organizational Values: Walking the
Tightrope to Success (San Francisco: Pfeiffer, 2002).
3. Charlene Marmer Solomon, ‘‘The Loyalty Factor,’’ Personnel Journal,
September 1992, 52–62.
4. Shari Caudron, ‘‘The Looming Leadership Crisis,’’ Workforce, September
1999, 72–79.
5. Arthur Deegan, Succession Planning: Key to Corporate Excellence
(New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1986), p. 5. [This book, while out of print, is a
classic.]
6. As quoted in Harper W. Moulton and Arthur A. Fickel, Executive Development:
Preparing for the 21st Century (New York: Oxford University Press,
1993), p. 29.
7. E. Zajac, ‘‘CEO Selection, Succession, Compensation and Firm Performance:
A Theoretical Integration and Empirical Analysis,’’ Strategic Management
Journal 11:3 (1990), 228. See also William Rothwell, ‘‘What’s Special
About CEO Succession?’’ Global CEO Magazine [India], March 2004, Special
Issue,15–20.
8. R. Sahl, ‘‘Succession Planning Drives Plant Turnaround,’’ Personnel
Journal 71:9 (1992), 67–70.
9. ‘‘Long-Term Business Success Can Hinge on Succession Planning,’’
Training Directors’ Forum Newsletter 5:4 (1989), 1.
10. Dirk Dreux, ‘‘Succession Planning and Exit Strategies,’’ CPA Journal
69:9 (1999), 30–35; Oliver Esman, ‘‘Succession Planning in Small and Medium-Sized
Companies,’’ HR Horizons 103 (1991), 15–19; Barton C. Francis,
‘‘Family Business Succession Planning,’’ Journal of Accountancy 176:2 (1993),
49–51; John O’Connell, ‘‘Triple-Tax Threat in Succession Planning,’’ National
Underwriter 102:40 (1998), 11, 19; T. Roger Peay and W. Gibb Dyer, Jr.,
‘‘Power Orientations of Entrepreneurs and Succession Planning,’’ Journal of
Small Business Management 27:1 (1989), 47–52; Michael J. Sales, ‘‘Succession
Planning in the Family Business,’’ Small Business Reports 15:2 (1990), 31–40.
367

368 N OTES
Chapter 1
1. Henry Fayol, Administration Industrielle et Generale (Paris: Société de
l’Industrie Minerale, 1916).
2. Norman H. Carter, ‘‘Guaranteeing Management’s Future Through Succession
Planning,’’ Journal of Information Systems Management 3:3 (1986),
13–14.
3. See the classic article, Michael Leibman, ‘‘Succession Management: The
Next Generation of Succession Planning,’’ Human Resource Planning 19:3
(1996), 16–29. See also Ram Charan, Stephen Drotter, and James Noel, The
Leadership Pipeline: How to Build the Leadership-Powered Company (San
Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 2001).
4. Richard Hansen and Richard H. Wexler, ‘‘Effective Succession Planning,’’
Employment Relations Today 15:1 (1989), 19.
5. See Chris Argyris and Donald Schön, Organizational Learning: A Theory
of Action Perspective (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1978); Peter Senge,
The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization (New
York: Doubleday/Currency, 1990).
6. Thomas P. Bechet, Strategic Staffing: A Practical Toolkit for Workforce
Planning (New York: AMACOM, 2002).
7. David E. Hartley, ‘‘Tools for Talent,’’ T D 58:4 (2004): 20–22.
8. Ibid., p. 21.
9. William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, The Strategic Development of
Talent (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2003).
10. Downloaded from http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?page
nameFT.com/Page/GenericPage2 &c Page&cid1079420675546 on 18
July 2004.
11. Stephen Overell, ‘‘A Meeting of Minds Brings HR into Focus,’’ downloaded
on 18 July 2004 from http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?page
nameFT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&cStoryFT&cid1079420676509&p10
79420675546
12. The Human Capital Challenge (Alexandria, Va.: ASTD, 2003).
13. J. Christopher Mihm, Human Capital: Succession Planning and Management
Is Critical Driver of Organizational Transformation (Washington,
D.C.: U.S. General Accounting Office, 2003).
14. Walter R. Mahler and Stephen J. Drotter, The Succession Planning
Handbook for the Chief Executive (Midland Park, N.J.: Mahler Publishing Co.,
1986), p. 1.
15. ‘‘Long-Term Business Success Can Hinge on Succession Planning,’’
Training Directors’ Forum Newsletter 5:4 (1989), 1.
16. Wilbur Moore, The Conduct of the Corporation (New York: Random
House, 1962), p. 109.
17. Rosabeth Moss Kanter, The Men and Women of the Corporation (New
York: Basic Books, 1977), p. 48.

Notes
369
18. Norman H. Carter, ‘‘Guaranteeing Management’s Future Through Succession
Planning,’’ Journal of Information Systems Management 3:3 (1986),
13–14.
19. Thomas Gilmore, Making a Leadership Change: How Organizations
and Leaders Can Handle Leadership Transitions Successfully (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1988), p. 19.
20. William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, The Strategic Development of
Talent (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2003).
21. Lynda Gratton and Michel Syrett, ‘‘Heirs Apparent: Succession Strategies
for the Future,’’ Personnel Management 22:1 (1990), 34.
22. A. Walker, ‘‘The Newest Job in Personnel: Human Resource Data Administrator,’’
Personnel Journal 61:12 (1982), 5.
23. William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, Planning and Managing
Human Resources: Strategic Planning for Personnel Management, 2nd. ed.
(Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2003).
24. Andrew O. Manzini and John D. Gridley, Integrating Human Resources
and Strategic Business Planning (New York: AMACOM, 1986), p. 3.
25. Peter Capelli, ‘‘A Market-Driven Approach to Retaining Talent,’’ Harvard
Business Review 78:1 (2000), 103–111; Joanne Cole, ‘‘De-Stressing the
Workplace,’’ HR Focus 76:10 (1999), 1, 10–11; Robert Leo, ‘‘Career Counseling
Works for Employers Too,’’ HR Focus 76:9 (1999), 6.
26. ‘‘The Numbers Game,’’ Time, 142:21 (1993), 14–15.
27. Ann Morrison, The New Leaders: Guidelines on Leadership Diversity
in America (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1992), p. 1.
28. Ibid., p. 7.
29. Arthur Sherman, George Bohlander, and Herbert Chruden, Managing
Human Resources, 8th ed. (Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing Co., 1988),
p. 226.
30. Warren Boroson and Linda Burgess, ‘‘Survivors’ Syndrome,’’ Across
the Board 29:11 (1992), 41–45.
31. Gilmore, Making a Leadership Change, p. 10.
32. Morrison, The New Leaders, p.1.
33. See, for instance, Robert M. Fulmer, ‘‘Choose Tomorrow’s Leaders
Today: Succession Planning Grooms Firms for Success.’’ Downloaded on 19
July 2004 from http://gbr.pepperdine.edu/021/succession.html; W. Rothwell
(Ed.), Effective Succession Management: Building Winning Systems for Identifying
and Developing Key Talent, 2nd ed. [See http://www.cfor.org/News/
article.asp?id4.] (Lexington, Mass.: The Center for Organizational Research
[A division of Linkage, Inc.], 2004); ‘‘Succession Management: Filling the Leadership
Pipeline,’’ Chief Executive, April 2004, 1, 4.
34. M. Haire, ‘‘Approach to an Integrated Personnel Policy,’’ Industrial
Relations, 1968, 107–117.
35. J. Stuller, ‘‘Why Not ‘Inplacement?‘‘ ‘ Training 30:6 (1993), 37–44.
36. William J. Rothwell, H. C. Kazanas, and Darla Haines, ‘‘Issues and Prac-

370 N OTES
tices in Management Job Rotation Programs as Perceived by HRD Professionals,’’
Performance Improvement Quarterly 5:1 (1992), 49–69. [This article is
the only existing research-based article on management job rotations that the
author can find.]
37. William J. Rothwell, ‘‘Go Beyond Replacing Executives and Manage
Your Work and Values.’’ In D. Ulrich, L. Carter, M. Goldsmith, J. Bolt, & N.
Smallwood (Eds.), The Change Champion’s Fieldguide (Waltham, Mass.: Best
Practice Publications, 2003), pp. 192–204.
38. Matt Hennecke, ‘‘Toward the Change-Sensitive Organization,’’ Training,
May 1991, 58.
39. D. Ancona and D. Nadler, ‘‘Top Hats and Executive Tales: Designing
the Senior Team,’’ Sloan Management Review 3:1 (1989), 19–28.
40. Ken Dychtwald, Tamara Erickson, and Bob Morison, ‘‘It’s Time to Retire
Retirement,’’ Harvard Business Review, March 2004, downloaded from
the online version on 3 May 2004.
Chapter 2
1. See William J. Rothwell, ‘‘Trends in Succession Management,’’ The Linkage,
Inc. eNewsletter, 2/15/00 (2000), presented on the Web at www.linkage
inc.com/newsletter26/research.htm.
2. See the now classic article, Michael Leibman, ‘‘Succession Management:
The Next Generation of Succession Planning,’’ Human Resource Planning
19:3 (1996), 16–29.
3. William J. Rothwell, Robert K. Prescott, and Maria Taylor, Strategic
Human Resource Leader: How to Help Your Organization Manage the 6
Trends Affecting the Workforce (Palo Alto, Calif.: Davies-Black Publishing,
1998).
4. Ibid.
5. P. Smith and D. Reinertsen, Developing Products in Half the Time (New
York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1991).
6. See Jac Fitz-Enz, How to Measure Human Resources Management (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1984).
7. ‘‘The Aging Baby Boomers,’’ Workplace Visions, Sept.-Oct. 1996, found
at www.shrm.org/issues/0996wv01.htm.
8. ‘‘Cross-Generational Approaches,’’ Workforce Strategies 17:11 (1999),
WS63–WS64.
9. Shari Caudron, ‘‘The Looming Leadership Crisis,’’ Workforce, September
1999, 72–79.
10. ‘‘The Aging Baby Boomers.’’
11. ‘‘Gap Between Rich and Poor Keeps Widening,’’ The CCPA Monitor,
1995, presented at http://infoweb.magi.com/ccpa/articles/article21t.html [Unfortunately
this site is restricted.]

Notes
371
12. Peter Cappelli, ‘‘A Market-Driven Approach to Retaining Talent,’’ Harvard
Business Review, Jan.-Feb. 2000, 103–111; Joseph Dobrian, ‘‘Amenities
Gain Ground as Recruiting/Retention Tools,’’ HR Focus, November 1999,
11–12.
13. Charlene Marmer Solomon, ‘‘The Loyalty Factor,’’ Personnel Journal,
September 1992, 52–62.
14. David L. Stum, ‘‘Five Ingredients for an Employee Retention Formula,’’
HR Focus, September 1998, S9–S10.
15. Lynn E. Densford, ‘‘Corporate Universities Add Value by Helping Recruit,
Retain Talent,’’ Corporate University Review 7:2 (1999), 8–12.
16. See, for instance, Thomas A. Stewart, ‘‘Have You Got What It Takes,’’
Fortune 140:7 (1999), 318–322.
17. Richard McDermott, ‘‘Why Information Technology Inspired but Cannot
Deliver Knowledge Management,’’ California Management Review 41:4
(1999), 103–117.
18. Dawn Anfuso, ‘‘Core Values Shape W. L. Gore’s Innovative Culture,’’
Workforce 78:3 (1999), 48–53; Donald Tosti, ‘‘Global Fluency,’’ Performance
Improvement 38:2 (1999), 49–54.
19. William J. Rothwell and John Lindholm, ‘‘Competency Identification,
Modelling and Assessment in the USA,’’ International Journal of Training and
Development 3:2 (1999), 90–105. For quality control in using competencies
for assessment, see: Harm Tillema, ‘‘Auditing Assessment Practices in Organizations:
Establishing Quality Criteria for Appraising Competencies,’’ International
Journal of Human Resources Development and Management, 3:4
(2003): 359.
20. Rothwell, Prescott, and Taylor, Strategic Human Resource Leader.
21. Bradley Agle, ‘‘Understanding Research on Values in Business,’’ Business
and Society 38:3 (1999), 326–387. See also K. Blanchard and M. O’Connor,
Managing by Values (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 1997); Ken Hultman
with Bill Gellerman, Balancing Individual and Organizational Values: Walking
the Tightrope to Success (San Francisco: Pfeiffer, 2002). The classic book
on values is still, of course, Milton Rokeach, The Nature of Human Values
(New York: The Free Press, 1973).
22. W. Davidson, C., Nemec, D., Worrell, and J. Lin, ‘‘Industrial Origin of
CEOs in Outside Succession: Board Preference and Stockholder Reaction,’’
Journal of Management and Governance, 6 (2002): 4.
23. Linda Bushrod, ‘‘Sorting Out Succession,’’ European Venture Capital
Journal, February 1, 2004, p. 1; Herbert Neubauer, ‘‘The Dynamics of Succession
in Family Businesses in Western European Countries,’’ Family Business
Review 16:4 (2003), 269–282; Slimane Haddadj, ‘‘Organization Change and
the Complexity of Succession: A Longitudinal Case Study from France,’’ Journal
of Organizational Change Management 15:2 (2003), 135–154.
24. Wendi J. Everton, ‘‘Growing Your Company’s Leaders: How Great Organizations
Use Succession Management to Sustain Competitive Advantage,’’
The Academy of Management Executive, 18:1 (Feb. 2004), 137.

372 N OTES
25. Sarah McBride, ‘‘Gray Area: In Corporate Asia, A Looming Crisis Over
Succession; As Empire Founders Age, Many Fail to Lay Proper Plans; ’You Want
to Get Rid of Me’; Daesung’s Three Heads,’’ Wall Street Journal, August 7
2003, A1.
26. Barry Came, ‘‘The Succession Question,’’ MacLean’s 112:8 (2003),
44–45. [However, admittedly, this article is about national leadership succession
rather than company succession.]
27. Matthew Bellingham and Dione Schick, ‘‘Succession Planning-Issues
for New Zealand Chartered Accountants,’’ Chartered Accountants Journal of
New Zealand 82:10 (2003), 24.
28. Will Hickey, ‘‘A Survey of MNC Succession Planning Effectiveness in
China, Summer 2001,’’ Performance Improvement Quarterly 15:4 (2002), 20.
29. William J. Rothwell, ‘‘Succession Planning and Management in Government:
Dreaming the Impossible Dream,’’ IPMA-HR News 69:10 (2003), 1,
7–9.
30. William J. Rothwell, ‘‘Start Assessing Retiring University Officials at
Your University,’’ HR on Campus 5:8 (2002), 5.
31. James Olan Hutcheson, ‘‘Triple Header: For Succession Planning to
Succeed, Retiring Business Owners Need Life-Planning Skills as Well as Financial
Advice,’’ Financial Planning, April 1, 2004, 1; Khai Sheang Lee, Guan Hua
Lim, and Wei Shi Lim, ‘‘Family Business Succession: Appropriation Risk and
Choice of Successor,’’ The Academy of Management Review 28:4 (October
2003), 657; William S. White, Timothy D. Krinke, and David L. Geller, ‘‘Family
Business Succession Planning: Devising an Overall Strategy,’’ Journal of Financial
Service Professionals 58:3 (2004), 67–86.
32. William S. White, Timothy D. Krinke, and David L. Geller, ‘‘Family
Business Succession Planning: Devising an Overall Strategy,’’ Journal of Financial
Service Professionals 58:3 (2004), 67.
33. D. Carey and D. Ogden, CEO Succession: A Window On How Boards
Can Get It Right When Choosing A New Chief Executive (New York: Oxford
University Press, 2000).
34. A classic article that summarizes much succession research is I. Kesner
and T. Sebora, ‘‘Executive Succession: Past, Present and Future,’’ Journal of
Management 20:2 (1994), 327–372.
35. S. Haddadj, ‘‘Organization Change and the Complexity of Succession:
A Longitudinal Case Study from France,’’ Journal of Organizational Change
Management 16:2 (2003), 135–153.
36. ‘‘Global CEO Turnover at Record Highs,’’ Financial Executive 19:5
(2003), 10.
37. D. Gabriel, ‘‘Lost Leaders,’’ Telephony 243:10 (2002), 44.
38. ‘‘PPG Industries Speeds, Refines Succession Preparation Process,’’
Workforce Strategies 17:10 (1999), WS57–WS58.

Notes
373
Chapter 3
1. This paragraph is based on information in C. Derr, C. Jones, and E.
Toomey, ‘‘Managing High-Potential Employees: Current Practices in Thirtythree
U.S. Corporations,’’ Human Resource Management 27:3 (1988), 278.
For more recent information, see also William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas,
Building In-House Leadership and Management Development Programs
(Westport, Conn.: Quorum, 1999), and David D. Dubois and William J. Rothwell,
The Competency Toolkit, 2 vols. (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2000). For
more recent thinking on high-potential workers, see Morgan W. McCall, Jr.,
High Flyers: Developing the Next Generation of Leaders (Boston: Harvard
Business School Press, 1998).
2. See William J. Rothwell, The Action Learning Guidebook: A Real-Time
Strategy for Problem-Solving, Training Design, and Employee Development
(San Francisco: Pfeiffer, 1999).
3. See S. Cunningham, ‘‘Coaching Today’s Executive,’’ Public Utilities
Fortnightly 128:2 (1991), 22–25; Steven J. Stowell and Matt Starcevich, The
Coach: Creating Partnerships for a Competitive Edge (Salt Lake City: The Center
for Management and Organization Effectiveness, 1987).
4. Charles E. Watson, Management Development Through Training (Reading,
Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1979).
5. Manuel London and Stephen A. Stumpf, Managing Careers (Reading,
Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1982), p. 274.
6. James E. McElwain, ‘‘Succession Plans Designed to Manage Change,’’
HR Magazine 36:2 (1991), 67.
7. James Fraze, ‘‘Succession Planning Should Be a Priority for HR Professionals,’’
Resource, June 1988, 4.
8. Ibid.
9. Ibid.
10. Ibid.
11. Thomas North Gilmore, Making a Leadership Change: How Organizations
Can Handle Leadership Transitions Successfully (San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 1988), p. 10.
12. Fraze, ‘‘Succession Planning Should Be a Priority,’’ 4.
13. David W. Rhodes, ‘‘Succession Planning—Overweight and Underperforming,’’
The Journal of Business Strategy 9:6 (1988), 62.
14. Ibid.
15. Ibid.
16. See Roland Sullivan, Linda Fairburn, and William J. Rothwell, ‘‘The
Whole System Transformation Conference: Fast Change for the 21st Century.’’
In S. Herman, ed., Rewiring Organizations for the Networked Economy: Organizing,
Managing, and Leading in the Information Age (San Francisco:
Pfeiffer, 2002), p. 117.

374 N OTES
17. See Jane Magruder Watkins and Bernard J. Mohr, Appreciative Inquiry:
Change at the Speed of Imagination (San Francisco: Pfeiffer, 2001).
18. See Diana Whitney, Amanda Trosten-Bloom, and David Cooperrider,
The Power of Appreciative Inquiry: A Practical Guide to Positive Change (San
Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2003).
Chapter 4
1. See R. White, ‘‘Motivation Reconsidered: The Concept of Competence,’’
Psychological Review 66 (1959), 279–333.
2. David C. McClelland, ‘‘Testing for Competence Rather Than for ‘Intelligence,’
’’ American Psychologist, January 1973, 1–14.
3. See J. C. Flanagan, ‘‘The Critical Incident Technique,’’ Psychological
Bulletin, April 1954, 327–358; J. Hayes, ‘‘A New Look at Managerial Competence:
The AMA Model for Worthy Performance,’’ Management Review, November
1979, 2–3; Patricia McLagan, ‘‘Competency Models,’’ Training and
Development Journal, December 1980, 23; L. Spencer & S. Spencer, Competence
at Work: Models for Superior Performance (New York: John Wiley &
Sons, 1993).
4. A. R. Boyatzis, The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1982), pp. 20–21.
5. David D. Dubois and William J. Rothwell, The Competency Toolkit, 2
vols. (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2000).
6. Ibid.
7. Ibid.
8. See David D. Dubois, The Executive’s Guide to Competency-Based Performance
Improvement (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 1996); D. D. Dubois, Ed.,
The Competency Case Book: Twelve Studies in Competency-Based Performance
Improvement (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press and the International Society
for Performance Improvement, 1998); David D. Dubois and William J. Rothwell,
The Competency Toolkit, 2 volumes (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2000);
David D. Dubois and William J. Rothwell, Competency-Based Human Resource
Management (Palo Alto, Calif.: Davies-Black, 2004); Jeffrey S. Shippman, Ronald
A. Ash, Linda Carr, Beryl Hesketh, Kenneth Pearlman, Mariangela Battista,
Lorraine D. Eyde, Jerry Kehoe, Erich Prien, and Juan Sanchez, ‘‘The Practice of
Competency Modeling,’’ Personnel Psychology 53:3 (2000), 703–740.
9. T. R. Athey and M. S. Orth, ‘‘Emerging Competency Methods for the
Future,’’ Human Resource Management 38:3 (1999), 215–226. See also Jay A.
Conger and Douglas A. Ready, ‘‘Rethinking Leadership Competencies,’’ Leader
to Leader, Spring 2004, 41–47.
10. David D. Dubois and William J. Rothwell, Competency-Based Human
Resource Management (Palo Alto, Calif.: Davies-Black, 2004).
11. Danny G. Langdon and Anne F. Marrelli, ‘‘A New Model for Systematic

Notes
375
Competency Identification,’’ Performance Improvement 41:4 (2002), 14–21.
If you want to see a case study online for developing a competency model (but
on a secure site open only to ASTD members), check out Karen Elizabeth
Tabet, ‘‘Implementing a Competency Model: A Short Case Study,’’ In Practice,
2004. It was found at the time this book goes to press at http://www.astd.org/
astd/Publications/ASTD_Links/April2004/InPractice_Ap ri l04_Tabet.htm
12. See, for instance, Susan H. Gebelein, Successful Manager’s Handbook:
Development Suggestions for Today’s Managers,6 th ed. (Minneapolis: Epredix,
2001).
13. Bradley Agle, ‘‘Understanding Research on Values in Business,’’ Business
& Society, September 1999, 326–387.
14. W. G. Lee, ‘‘A Conversation with Herb Kelleher,’’ Organizational Dynamics
23:2 (1994), 64–74.
15. A. Farnham, ‘‘State Your Values, Hold the Hot Air,’’ Fortune, August
1993, 117–124.
16. See, for instance, William J. Pfeiffer, Ed., The Encyclopedia of Group
Activities (San Diego: University Associates, 1989); and Barbara Singer and
Kathleen Von Buren, Work Values: Facilitation Guide for Managers, Teams &
Trainers (Durango, Colo.: Self-Management Institute, 1995).
17. Michael Hickins, ‘‘A Day at the Races,’’ Management Review 88:5
(1999), 56–61.
18. W. Rothwell, ‘‘Go beyond replacing executives and manage your work
and values,’’ in D. Ulrich, L. Carter, M. Goldsmith, J. Bolt, and N. Smallwood
(eds.), The Change Champion’s Filedguide (Waltham, Mass.: Best Practice Publications,
2003), pp. 192–204.
Chapter 5
1. Jac Fitz-Enz, How to Measure Human Resources Management (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1984), p. 48. See also Jac Fitz-Enz, The ROI of Human
Capital (New York: AMACOM, 2000).
2. Fitz-Enz, How to Measure, p. 48.
3. Particularly good articles on this topic include: Paul Brauchle, ‘‘Costing
Out the Value of Training,’’ Technical and Skills Training 3:4 (1992), 35–40;
J. Hassett, ‘‘Simplifying ROI,’’ Training, September 1992; J. Phillips, ‘‘Measuring
the Return on HRD,’’ Employment Relations Today, August 1991.
4. For example, see especially the classic but dated C. Derr, C. Jones, and
E. Toomey, ‘‘Managing High-Potential Employees: Current Practices in Thirtythree
U.S. Corporations,’’ Human Resource Management 27:3 (1988), 273–
290; O. Esman, ‘‘Succession Planning in Small and Medium-Sized Corporations,’’
HR Horizons 91:103 (1991), 15–19; The Identification and Development
of High Potential Managers (Palatine, Ill.: Executive Knowledgeworks,
1987); Meg Kerr, Succession Planning in America’s Corporations (Palatine,

376 N OTES
Ill.: Anthony J. Fresina and Associates and Executive Knowledgeworks, 1987);
and E. Zajac, ‘‘CEO Selection, Succession, Compensation and Firm Performance:
A Theoretical Integration and Empirical Analysis,’’ Strategic Management
Journal 11:3 (1990), 217–230.
5. P. Linkow, ‘‘HRD at the Roots of Corporate Strategy,’’ Training and
Development Journal 39:5 (1985), 85–87; William J. Rothwell, ed., In Action:
Linking HRD and Organizational Strategy (Alexandria, Va.: The American Society
for Training and Development, 1998).
6. Karen A. Golden and Vasudevan Ramanujam, ‘‘Between a Dream and a
Nightmare: On the Integration of the Human Resource Management and Strategic
Business Planning Processes,’’ Human Resource Management 24:4
(1985), 429.
7. William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, The Strategic Development of
Talent (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2003).
8. See William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, ‘‘Training: Key to Strategic
Management,’’ Performance Improvement Quarterly 3:1 (1990), 42–56; and
William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, Planning and Managing Human Resources:
Strategic Planning for Personnel Management, 2nd ed. (Amherst,
Mass.: HRD Press, 2003).
9. Robert C. Camp, Benchmarking: The Search for Industry Best Practices
That Lead to Superior Performance (Milwaukee, Wisc.: Quality Press/American
Society for Quality Control; White Plains, N.Y.: Quality Resources, 1989), p. 3.
See also Michael J. Spendolini, The Benchmarking Book (New York: AMACOM,
1992).
10. Ibid., p. 17.
11. Diane Dormant, ‘‘The ABCDs of Managing Change,’’ in M. Smith, Ed.,
Introduction to Performance Technology (Washington, D.C.: The National Society
for Performance and Instruction, 1986), pp. 238–256.
12. Ibid., p. 239.
13. Ibid., p. 241.
14. Jack Welch and John A. Byrne, Jack: Straight from the Gut (New York:
Warner Business Books, 2001).
15. ‘‘Business: The King Lear Syndrome: Succession Planning,’’ The Economist
369:8354 (2003), 75.
Chapter 6
1. James L. Gibson, John M. Ivancevich, and James H. Donnelly, Jr., Organizations:
Behavior, Structure, Processes, 5th ed. (Plano, Tex.: Business Publications,
1985), p. 280.
2. Walter R. Mahler and Stephen J. Drotter, The Succession Planning
Handbook for the Chief Executive (Midland Park, N.J.: Mahler Publishing,
1986), p. 8.

Notes
377
3. ‘‘Choosing Your Successor,’’ Chief Executive Magazine, May/June 1988,
48–63; Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, The Hero’s Farewell: What Happens When CEOs
Retire (New York: Oxford University Press, 1988); Richard F. Vancil, Passing
the Baton: Managing the Process of CEO Succession (Boston: Harvard Business
School Press, 1987); E. Zajac, ‘‘CEO Selection, Succession, Compensation
and Firm Performance: A Theoretical Integration and Empirical Analysis,’’ Strategic
Management Journal 11:3 (1990), 217–230. See also D. Carey and D.
Ogden, CEO Succession: A Window On How Boards Can Get It Right When
Choosing A New Chief Executive (New York: Oxford University Press, 2000)
and
4. ‘‘Global CEO Turnover at Record Highs,’’ Financial Executive 19:5
(2003), 10.
Chapter 7
1. Allen Kraut, Patricia Pedigo, Douglas McKenna, and Marvin Dunnette,
‘‘The Role of the Manager: What’s Really Important in Different Management
Jobs,’’ Academy of Management Executive 3:4 (1989), 287.
2. See, for instance, R. Smither, ‘‘The Return of the Authoritarian Manager,’’
Training 28:11 (1991), 40–44.
Chapter 8
1. M. Pastin, ‘‘The Fallacy of Long-Range Thinking,’’ Training 23:5 (1986),
47–53.
2. B. Staw, ‘‘Knee-Deep in the Big Muddy,’’ Organizational Behavior and
Human Performance 16:1 (1976), 27–44.
3. Karen Stephenson and Valdis Krebs, ‘‘A More Accurate Way to Measure
Diversity,’’ Personnel Journal 72:10 (1993), 66–72, 74.
4. Rosabeth Moss Kanter, The Men and Women of the Corporation (New
York: Basic Books, 1977), p. 48.
5. Ibid.
6. Glenn E. Baker, A. Grubbs, and Thomas Ahern, ‘‘Triangulation:
Strengthening Your Best Guess,’’ Performance Improvement Quarterly 3:3
(1990), 27–35.
7. Arthur W. Sherman, Jr., George W. Bohlander, and Herbert Chruden,
Managing Human Resources, 8th ed. (Cincinnati: South-Western Publishing
Co., 1988), pp. 95–96.
8. For one excellent approach, see Roger J. Plachy and Sandra J. Plachy,
Results-Oriented Job Descriptions (New York: AMACOM, 1993). See also
Model Job Descriptions for Business (N.p.: Local Government Institute, 1997).
9. W. Barlow and E. Hane, ‘‘A Practical Guide to the Americans with Disabilities
Act,’’ Personnel Journal 71:6 (1992), 54.

378 N OTES
10. Kenneth E. Carlisle, Analyzing Jobs and Tasks (Englewood Cliffs, N.J.:
Educational Technology Publications, 1986), p. 5.
11. See Barlow and Hane, ‘‘A Practical Guide,’’ 53–60; M. Chalker, ‘‘Tooling
Up for ADA,’’ HR Magazine, December 1991, 61–63, 65; and J. Kohl and
P. Greenlaw, ‘‘The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990: Implications for
Managers,’’ Sloan Management Review 33:3 (1992), 87–90.
12. See, for instance, Roger J. Plachy and Sandra J. Plachy, Results-Oriented
Job Descriptions (New York: AMACOM, 1993).
13. William J. Rothwell, ‘‘HRD and the Americans with Disabilities Act,’’
Training and Development 45:8 (1991), 45–47.
14. Richard Boyatzis, The Competent Manager: A Model for Effective Performance
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1982).
15. David Dubois, Competency-Based Performance Improvement: A Strategy
for Organizational Change (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 1993), p. 9.
16. Ibid.
17. R. Norton, Dacum Handbook (Columbus, Ohio: The National Center
for Research in Vocational Education, The Ohio State University, 1985). See
also D. Faber, E. Fangman, and J. Low, ‘‘DACUM: A Collaborative Tool for
Workforce Development,’’ Journal of Studies in Technical Careers 13:2
(1991), 145–159.
18. Ibid., pp. 1–2.
19. See A. Osborn, Applied Imagination, 3rd ed. (New York: Scribner,
1963); A. Van Gundy, Techniques of Structured Problem Solving (New York:
Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1981); Michael Michalko, Thinkertoys: A Handbook
of Business Creativity for the 90s (Berkeley, Calif.: Ten Speed Press, 1991);
Dario Nardi, Multiple Intelligences and Personality Type: Tools and Strategies
for Developing Human Potential (Huntington Beach, Calif.: Telos Publications,
2001); Pamela Meyer, Quantum Creativity (New York: McGraw-Hill,
2000).
20. A. Van Gundy, Techniques of Structured Problem Solving.
21. G. Huet-Cox, T. M. Nielsen, and E. Sundstrom, ‘‘Get the Most From
360-Degree Feedback: Put It on the Internet,’’ HR Magazine 44:5 (1999), 92–
103; ‘‘Finding Leaders: How Ameritech Feeds Its Pipeline,’’ Training Directors’
Forum Newsletter 15:5 (1999), 4.
22. Leanne Atwater and David Waldman, ‘‘Accountability in 360-Degree
Feedback,’’ HR Magazine 43:6 (1998), 96–104. The article asserts that over 90
percent of Fortune 1000 companies use some form of multisource assessment.
For more information on full-circle, multirater assessment, see David D. Dubois
and William J. Rothwell, The Competency Toolkit, 2 vols. (Amherst, Mass.:
HRD Press, 2000); Keith Morical, ‘‘A Product Review: 360 Assessments,’’ Training
and Development 53:4 (1999), 43–47; Kenneth Nowack, Jeanne Hartley,
and William Bradley, ‘‘How to Evaluate Your 360-Feedback Efforts,’’ Training
& Development 53:4 (1999), 48–53; David Waldman and David E. Bowen,
‘‘The Acceptability of 360-Degree Appraisals: A Customer-Supplier Relation-

Notes
379
ship Perspective,’’ Human Resource Management 37:2 (1998), 117–129.
Other recent writings on 360-degree assessment include Anne Freedman,
‘‘The Evolution of 360s,’’ Human Resource Executive, 16:17 (2002), 47–51;
Marnie E. Green, ‘‘Ensuring the Organization’s Future: A Leadership Development
Case Study,’’ Public Personnel Management 31:4 (2002), 431–439; Fred
Luthans and Suzanne J. Peterson, ‘‘360-Degree Feedback with Systematic
Coaching: Empirical Analysis Suggests a Winning Combination,’’ Human Resource
Management 42:3 (2003), 243–256; Bruce Pfau and Ira Kay, ‘‘Does
360-Degree Feedback Negatively Affect Company Performance?’’, HR Magazine
47:6 (2002), 54–59; Scott Wimer, ‘‘The Dark Side of 360-Degree Feedback,’’
T D 56:9 (2002), 37–42.
23. See, for instance, Paul J. Taylor and Jon L. Pierce, ‘‘Effects of Introducing
a Performance Management System on Employees’ Subsequent Attitudes
and Effort,’’ Public Personnel Management 28:3 (1999), 423–452.
24. See, for instance, Performance Appraisals: The Ongoing Legal Nightmare
(Ramsey, N.J.: Alexander Hamilton Institute, 1993).
25. Mary Walton, The Deming Management Method (New York: Perigee
Books, 1986), p. 91.
26. See, for instance, S. Cunningham, ‘‘Coaching Today’s Executive,’’ Public
Utilities Fortnightly 128:2 (1991), 22–25; David L. Dotlich and Peter C.
Cairo, Action Coaching: How to Leverage Individual Performance for Company
Success (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999); Steven J. Stowell and Matt
Starcevich, The Coach: Creating Partnerships for a Competitive Edge (Salt
Lake City: The Center for Management and Organization Effectiveness, 1987).
27. BLR Encyclopedia of Performance Appraisal (Madison, Conn.: Business
and Legal Reports, 1985). See also Richard C. Grote, The Complete Guide
to Performance Appraisal (New York: AMACOM, 1996).
28. David D. Dubois and William J. Rothwell, Competency-Based Human
Resource Management (Palo Alto, Calif.: Davies-Black, 2004).
29. Paul Kaihla, ‘‘Getting Inside the Boss’s Head,’’ Business 2.0 4:10
(2003), 49.
30. Scott Highhouse, ‘‘Assessing the Candidate as a Whole: A Historical
and Critical Analysis of Individual Psychological Assessment for Personnel Decision-Making,’’
Personnel Psychology 55:2 (2002), 363–396.
Chapter 9
1. See William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, Planning and Managing
Human Resources: Strategic Planning for Personnel Management, 2nd ed.
(Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2003).
2. William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, ‘‘Developing Management Employees
to Cope with the Moving Target Effect,’’ Performance and Instruction
32:8 (1993), 1–5.

380 N OTES
3. See, for instance, Newman S. Peery, Jr., and Mahmoud Salem, ‘‘Strategic
Management of Emerging Human Resource Issues,’’ Human Resource Development
Quarterly 4:1 (1993), 81–95; Raynold A. Svenson and Monica J. Rinderer,
The Training and Development Strategic Plan Workbook (Englewood
Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall, 1992). For works specifically on environmental
scanning, see F. Aguilar, Scanning the Business Environment (New York: Macmillan,
1967); Patrick Callan, Ed., Environmental Scanning for Strategic Leadership
(San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986); L. Fahey, W. King, and V. Narayanan,
‘‘Environmental Scanning and Forecasting in Strategic Planning—The State of
the Art,’’ Long Range Planning 14:1 (1981), 32–39; R. Heath and Associates,
Strategic Issues Management: How Organizations Influence and Respond to
Public Interests and Policies (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1988).
4. Harry Levinson, Organizational Diagnosis (Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard
University Press, 1972); A. O. Manzini, Organizational Diagnosis (New York:
AMACOM, 1988); and Marvin Weisbord, Organizational Diagnosis: A Workbook
of Theory and Practice (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1978).
5. This is an issue of classic debate: Does structure affect strategy or does
strategy affect structure? The first discussion appears in A. Chandler, Strategy
and Structure: Chapters in the History of American Industrial Enterprise
(Cambridge, Mass.: Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 1962). Other authors
are not sure that strategy always affects structure. See, for instance, J.
Galbraith and D. Nathanson, ‘‘The Role of Organizational Structure and Process
in Strategy Implementation,’’ in D. Schendel and C. Hofer, Eds., Strategic
Management (Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1979).
6. See Kees Van Der Heijden, Scenarios: The Art of Strategic Conversation
(New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1996); and William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas,
The Strategic Development of Talent (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2003).
7. See, for instance, the classic article by J. Wissema, A. Brand, and H.
Van Der Pol, ‘‘The Incorporation of Management Development in Strategic
Management,’’ Strategic Management Journal 2 (1981), 361–377.
8. See remarks in Larry Davis and E. McCallon, Planning, Conducting,
Evaluating Workshops (Austin, Tex.: Learning Concepts, 1974).
9. Rothwell and Kazanas, ‘‘Developing Management Employees,’’ 1–5.
10. See Rothwell and Kazanas, Planning and Managing Human Resources.
11. Melvin Sorcher, Predicting Executive Success: What It Takes to Make
It Into Senior Management (New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1985), p. 2.
12. William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, Building In-House Leadership
and Management Development Programs (Westport, Conn.: Quorum Books,
1999).
13. Ibid.
14. See the classic study: E. Lindsey, V. Homes, and M. McCall, Key Events
in Executives’ Lives (Greensboro, N.C.: The Center for Creative Leadership,
1987).
15. This approach is described at length in George S. Odiorne, Strategic

Notes
381
Management of Human Resources: A Portfolio Approach (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1984).
16. Ibid.
17. Ibid.
18. Ibid.
19. Ibid.
20. Rose Mary Wentling, ‘‘Women in Middle Management: Their Career
Development and Aspirations,’’ Business Horizons (January-February 1992),
47–54.
21. ‘‘Assessment Centres Show Signs of Growth’’ (2004, February 24), 47.
22. Cam Caldwell, George C. Thornton III, and Melissa L Gruys. ‘‘Ten
Classic Assessment Center Errors: Challenges to Selection Validity.’’ Public
Personnel Management 32:1 (2003), 73–88.
23. For more on assessment centers, see: International Task Force on Assessment
Center Guidelines, ‘‘Guidelines and Ethical Considerations for Assessment
Center Operations: International Task Force on Assessment Center
Guidelines,’’ Public Personnel Management 29:3 (2000), 315–331; P. G. Jansen
and B. A. M. Stoop, ‘‘The Dynamics of Assessment Center Validity: Results
of a 7-Year Study,’’ Journal of Applied Psychology 86:4 (2001), 741–753; G. C.
Thornton, Assessment Centers in Human Resource Management (Reading,
Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1992); A. Tziner, S. Ronen, and D. Hacohen, ‘‘A Fouryear
Validation Study of an Assessment Center in a Financial Corporation,‘‘
Journal of Organizational Behavior 14 (1993), 225–237.
Chapter 10
1. Walter R. Mahler and Stephen J. Drotter, The Succession Planning
Handbook for the Chief Executive (Midland Park, N.J.: Mahler Publishing Co.,
1986).
2. Peter F. Drucker, ‘‘How to Make People Decisions,’’ Harvard Business
Review 63:4 (1985), 22–26.
3. Lawrence S. Kleiman and Kimberly J. Clark, ‘‘User’s Satisfaction with
Job Posting,’’ Personnel Administrator 29:9 (1984), 104–108.
4. Lawrence S. Kleiman and Kimberly J. Clark, ‘‘An Effective Job Posting
System,’’ Personnel Journal 63:2 (1984), 20–25.
5. Malcolm Knowles, Using Learning Contracts: Practical Approaches to
Individualizing and Structuring Learning (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1986),
pp. 28–32.
6. R. Fritz, Personal Performance Contracts: The Key to Job Success (Los
Altos, Calif.: Crisp, 1987).
7. Arthur X. Deegan II, Succession Planning: Key to Corporate Excellence
(New York: Wiley-Interscience, 1986), p. 167.
8. Robert F. Mager, Preparing Instructional Objectives, 2nd ed. (Belmont,
Calif.: Lear-Siegler, 1975).

382 N OTES
9. M. Lombardo and R. Eichinger, Eighty-eight Assignments for Development
in Place: Enhancing the Developmental Challenge of Existing Jobs
(Greensboro, N.C.: The Center for Creative Leadership, 1989).
10. A. Huczynski, Encyclopedia of Management Development Methods
(London: Gower, 1983).
11. See, for instance, Paul R. Yost and Mary Mannion Plunkett, ‘‘Turn Business
Strategy Into Leadership Development,’’ T D 56:3 (2002), 48–51.
12. See, for instance, William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, Building In-
House Leadership and Management Development Programs (Westport,
Conn.: Quorum, 1999) and Marshall Tarley, ‘‘Leadership Development for
Small Organizations,’’ T D 56:3 (2002), 52–55.
13. Maryse Dubouloy, ‘‘The Transitional Space and Self-Recovery: A Psychoanalytical
Approach to High-Potential Managers’ Training,’’ Human Relations
57:4 (2004), 467–496; ‘‘A Formal Coaching Program,’’ Sales and
Marketing Management, 156:7 (2004), 14; Stephen Hrop, ‘‘Coaching Across
Cultures: New Tools for Leveraging National, Corporate, and Professional Differences,’’
Personnel Psychology 57:1 (2004), 220–223; Leigh Rivenbark,
‘‘Adaptive Coaching,’’ HR Magazine 49:5 (2004), 128–129; Mark Rotella, Sarah
F Gold, Lynn Andriani, Michael Scharf, and Emily Chenoweth, ‘‘Leverage Your
Best, Ditch The Rest: The Coaching Secrets Top Executives Depend On,’’ Publishers
Weekly 251:20 (2004), 45.
14. Chris Bones, ‘‘Coaching? It’s What Managers Are For,’’ Human Resources,
June 2004, 14.
15. James M. Hunt and Joseph R. Weintraub, The Coaching Manager: Developing
Top Talent in Business (Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications,
2002).
16. See the Coaching Federation of Canada Web site (http://www
.coach.ca/e/nccp/) and an ERIC Web site with a list of them available, at least
on 17 July 2004, at http://www.ericdigests.org/pre-9212/coaching.htm
17. See, for instance, http://www.coachfederation.org/credentialing/en/
core.htm. [That is the Web site of the International Coaching Federation,
which has a competency model for coaching on the Web in downloadable
format.]
18. Heather Johnson, ‘‘The Ins and Outs of Executive Coaching,’’ Training
41:5 (2004), 36–41.
19. See, for instance, the Worldwide Association of Business Coaches at
http://www.wabccoaches.com/.
20. See, for an example, http://mycoach.com/ethics_abeta.shtml
21. See http://www.execcoach.net/Competences.htm
22. Edgar Schein, Process Consultation Revisited: Building the Helping
Relationship (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1998).
23. S. J. Armstrong, C. W. Allinson, and J. Hayes, ‘‘Formal Mentoring Systems:
An Examination of the Effects of Mentor/Protégé Cognitive Styles on the

Notes
383
Mentoring Process,’’ The Journal of Management Studies 39 (December
2002), 1111–1137; N. Bozionelos, ‘‘Mentoring Provided: Relation to Mentor’s
Career Success, Personality, and Mentoring Received,’’ Journal of Vocational
Behavior 64 (February 2004), 24–46; C. Conway, Strategies for Mentoring: A
Blueprint for Successful Organizational Development (New York: John
Wiley & Sons, 1998); V. M. Godshalk and J. J. Sosik, ‘‘Does Mentor-Protégé
Agreement on Mentor Leadership Behavior Influence the Quality of a Mentoring
Relationship?’’ Group and Organization Management 25 (September
2000), 291–317; B.A. Hamilton and T. A. Scandura, ‘‘E-Mentoring: Implications
for Organizational Learning and Development in a Wired World,’’ Organizational
Dynamics 31:4 (2003), 388–402.
24. Reg Revans, Developing Effective Managers (New York: Praeger,
1971).
25. David L. Dotlich and James L. Noel, Action Learning : How the World’s
Top Companies are Re-Creating Their Leaders and Themselves (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1998); Ian McGill and Liz Beaty, Action Learning: A Guide for
Professional, Management & Educational Development, 2nd ed. (New York:
Taylor and Francis, 2001); Michael Marquardt, Action Learning in Action:
Transforming Problems and People for World-Class Organizational Learning
(Palo Alto, Calif.: Davies-Black, 1999); Michael Marquardt, Optimizing the
Power of Action Learning: Solving Problems and Building Leaders in Real
Time (Palo Alto, Calif.: Davies-Black, 2004).
26. Michael Marquardt, ‘‘Harnessing the Power of Action Learning,’’
T D 58:6 (2004), 26–32.
27. William J. Rothwell, The Action Learning Guidebook: A Real-Time
Strategy for Problem-Solving, Training Design, and Employee Development
(San Francisco: Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer, 1999).
Chapter 11
1. James L. Adams, Conceptual Blockbusting: A Guide to Better Ideas, 3rd
ed. (Reading, Mass.: Addison-Wesley, 1986), p. 7.
2. Michael Hammer and James Champy, Reegineering the Corporation: A
Manifesto for Business Revolution (New York: HarperBusiness, 1993), p. 32.
3. G. Rummler and A. Brache, ‘‘Managing the White Space,’’ Training 28:1
(1991), 55–70.
4. See Eva Kaplan-Leiserson, ‘‘Aged to Perfection,’’ TD 55:10 (2001),
16–17; and Neil Lebovits, ‘‘Seniors Returning to the Accounting Workforce:
Supply Meets Demand,’’ The CPA Journal, 73:11 (2003), 14.
5. Anne Freedman, ‘‘What Shortage?’’ Human Resource Executive 18:4
(2004), 26–28.
6. Dayton Fandray, ‘‘Gray Matters,’’ Workforce 79:7 (2000), 26–32.

384 N OTES
Chapter 12
1. For assistance in conceptualizing a skill inventory and/or a recordkeeping
system for that purpose, see D. Gould, Personnel Skills Inventory Skill
Study (Madison, Conn.: Business and Legal Reports, 1986).
Chapter 13
1. William J. Rothwell and Henry J. Sredl, The American Society for Training
and Development Reference Guide to Workplace Learning and Performance,
3rd ed., 2 vols. (Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2000).
2. See Nancy Dixon, Evaluation: A Tool for Improving HRD Quality (Alexandria,
Va.: The American Society for Training and Development, 1990); Jack
Phillips, Handbook of Training Evaluation and Measurement Methods, 2nd
ed. (Houston: Gulf Publishing, 1991); Leslie Rae, How to Measure Training
Effectiveness (Brookfield, Vt.: Gower Publishing, 1991); William J. Rothwell,
Ed., Creating, Measuring and Documenting Service Impact: A Capacity Building
Resource: Rationales, Models, Activities, Methods, Techniques, Instruments
(Columbus, Ohio: The Enterprise Ohio Network, 1998).
3. Paul Brauchle, ‘‘Costing Out the Value of Training,’’ Technical and
Skills Training 3:4 (1992), 35–40; W. Cascio, Costing Human Resources: The
Financial Impact of Behavior in Organizations, 2nd ed. (Boston: PWS-Kent
Publishing, 1987); C. Fauber, ‘‘Use of Improvement (Learning) Curves to Predict
Learning Costs,’’ Production and Inventory Management 30:3 (1989),
57–60; T. Jackson, Evaluation: Relating Training to Business Performance
(San Diego: Pfeiffer and Company, 1989); L. Spencer, Calculating Human Resource
Costs and Benefits (Somerset, N.J.: John Wiley and Sons, 1986); Richard
Swanson and Deane Gradous, Forecasting Financial Benefits of Human Resource
Development (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1988).
4. See Donald Kirkpatrick, ‘‘Techniques for Evaluating Training Programs,’’
Journal of the American Society for Training and Development [now
called T D] 14:1 (1960), 13–18.
5. R. Brinkerhoff, ‘‘The Success Case: A Low-Cost High-Yield Evaluation,’’
Training and Development Journal 37:8 (1983), 58–61. See also Rothwell,
Ed., Creating, Measuring and Documenting Service Impact.
6. See William J. Rothwell and H. C. Kazanas, Planning and Managing
Human Resources: Strategic Planning for Personnel Management, 2nd ed.
(Amherst, Mass.: HRD Press, 2003).
Chapter 14
1. See Pamela Babcock, ‘‘Slicing Off Pieces of HR,’’ HR Magazine 49:7
(2004), 70; Karen Colteryahn and Patty Davis, ‘‘8 Trends You Need to Know
Now,’’ T D 58:1 (2004), 28–36; Simon Kent, ‘‘When Is Enough, Enough?’’

Notes
385
Personnel Today, June 15, 2004, 7; James F. Orr, ‘‘Outsourcing Human Resources,’’
Chief Executive, June 2004, 16; Sara L. Rynes, ‘‘’Where Do We Go
From Here?’ Imagining New Roles for Human Resources,’’ Journal of Management
Inquiry 13:3 (2004), 203–213; William B. Scott and Carole Hedden,
‘‘People Issues: Good Leaders, Ethics, Growth Opportunities Rank High on
Employee Preference Lists,’’ Aviation Week and Space Technology 160:18
(2004), 61; Uyen Vu, ‘‘HR Responds to Cost Crunch with Workforce Cuts:
Survey,’’ Canadian HR Reporter 17:11 (2004), 1–2; Joe Willmore, ‘‘The Future
of Performance,’’ T D, August 2004, 26–31, 49, 53; Ron Zemke, ‘‘The Confidence
Crisis,’’ Training 41:6 (2004), 22–27.
2. Anonymous, ‘‘An HR Outsourcing Report,’’ Employee Benefit Plan Review
59:1 (2004), 5–6; ‘‘The Return of Work/Life Plans,’’ HR Focus 81:4
(2004), 1–3; Damon Cline, ‘‘Companies Seeking ‘Right’ Candidates Increasingly
Turn to Personality Tests,’’ Knight Ridder Tribune Business News, March
9, 2004, 1; Kristine Ellis, ‘‘Top Training Strategies,’’ Training 40:7 (2003),
30–36; Brandon Hall, ‘‘Time to Outsource?’’, Training 41:6 (2004), 14; Fay
Hansen, ‘‘Currents in Compensation and Benefits,’’ Compensation and Benefits
Review 36:3 (2004), 6–25.
3. Craig E. Aronoff and Christopher J. Eckrich, ‘‘Trends in Family-Business
Transitions,’’ Nation’s Business 87:5 (1999), 62–63; John Beeson, ‘‘Succession
Planning,’’ Across the Board 37:2 (2000), 38–41; Ram Charan and Geoffrey
Colvin, ‘‘The Right Fit,’’ Fortune 141:8 (2000), 226–233; Robert J. Grossman,
‘‘HR On the Board,’’ HR Magazine 49:6 (2004), 56–63; William J. Rothwell,
‘‘What’s Special about CEO Succession?’’ Global CEO Magazine, March 2004,
15–20; William J. Rothwell, ‘‘Knowledge Transfer: 12 Strategies For Succession
Management,’’ IPMA-HR News, July 2004, 10–12; William J. Rothwell, ‘‘Competency-Based
Succession Planning: Do I Fit In? The Individual’s Role in Succession
Planning,’’ Career Planning and Adult Development Journal 18:4
(2003), 120–135; William J. Rothwell, ‘‘Succession Planning and Management
in Government: Dreaming the Impossible Dream,’’ IPMA-HR News 69:10
(2003), 1, 7—9; William J. Rothwell and Christopher Faust, ‘‘Managing the
Quiet Crisis: The Impact of an Effective Succession Plan: Leveraging Web-
Based Human Capital Management Systems to Plan for the Future and Manage
the Talent Pool Today,’’ Published online at http://www.softscape.com/white
papers/whitepapers.htm.; William J. Rothwell ‘‘Beyond Succession Management:
New Directions and Fresh Approaches,’’ Linkage Link and Learn Newsletter,
published at http://www.linkageinc.com/newsletter/archives/leadership/
beyond_succession erothwell.shtml.; William J. Rothwell, ‘‘Go Beyond Replacing
Executives and Manage Your Work and Values,’’ in D. Ulrich, L. Carter, M.
Goldsmith, J. Bolt & N. Smallwood (Eds.), The Change Champion’s Fieldguide
(pp. 192–204). (Waltham, Mass.: Best Practice Publications, 2003); George B.
Yancey, ‘‘Succession Planning Creates Quality Leadership,’’ Credit Union Executive
Journal 41:6 (2001), 24–27.
4. Susan Ladika, ‘‘Executive Protection: Terror Alerts and Corporate Board

386 N OTES
Liability Are Focusing New Attention on Security Issues for Top Company Officers,’’
HR Magazine 49:10 (2004), 105–106, 108–109.
5. See Thomas Hoffman, ‘‘Labor Gap May Drive Mergers,’’ Online News,
July 13, 1998, at http://www.idg.net/crd[lh.5,p6]it[lh.5,p6]9–65593.html.
6. Jennifer Reingold and Diane Brady, ‘‘Brain Drain,’’ Business Week, September
20, 1999, 112–115, 118, 120, 124, 126.
7. Ibid.
8. Ibid.
9. Leslie Gross Klaff, ‘‘Thinning the Ranks of the ’Career Expats,’ ’’ Workforce
Management 83:10 (2004), 84–84, 86–87.
10. W. Rothwell and S. Poduch, ‘‘Introducing Technical (Not Managerial)
Succession Planning,’’ Personnel Management, 33(4), 2004, pp. 405–420.

WHAT’S ON THE CD?
Selected Worksheets and Resources from the Book
Exhibit 2-1. An Assessment Questionnaire: How Well Is Your Organization
Managing the Consequences of Trends Influencing Succession Planning
and Management?
Exhibit 3-2. Assessment Questionnaire for Effective Succession Planning and
Management
Exhibit 3-3. A Simple Exercise to Dramatize the Need for Succession Planning
and Management
Exhibit 5-4. A Questionnaire for Assessing the Status of Succession Planning
and Management in an Organization
Exhibit 5-5. A Worksheet for Demonstrating the Need for Succession Planning
and Management
Exhibit 5-6. An Interview Guide for Determining the Requirements for a Succession
Planning and Management Program
Exhibit 5-7. An Interview Guide for Benchmarking Succession Planning and
Management Practices
Exhibit 6-3. A Worksheet to Formulate a Mission Statement for Succession
Planning and Management
Exhibit 6-4. A Sample Succession Planning and Management Policy
Exhibit 6-6. An Activity for Identifying Initial Targets for Succession Planning
and Management Activities
Exhibit 6-7. An Activity for Establishing Program Priorities in Succession Planning
and Management
Exhibit 6-8. Handout: U.S. Labor Laws
Exhibit 7-1. A Worksheet for Preparing an Action Plan to Establish the Succession
Planning and Management Program
Exhibit 8-1. A Worksheet for Writing a Key Position Description
Exhibit 8-2. A Worksheet for Considering Key Issues in Full-Circle, Multirater
Assessments
Exhibit 8-5. A Worksheet for Developing an Employee Performance Appraisal
Linked to a Position Description
Exhibit 9-1. A Worksheet for Environmental Scanning
387

388 W HAT’S ONTHECD?
Exhibit 9-2. An Activity on Organizational Analysis
Exhibit 9-3. An Activity for Preparing Realistic Scenarios to Identify Future Key
Positions
Exhibit 9-4. An Activity for Preparing Future-Oriented Key Position Descriptions
Exhibit 9-5. Steps in Conducting Future-Oriented ‘‘Rapid Results Assessment’’
Exhibit 9-6. How to Classify Individuals by Performance and Potential
Exhibit 9-7. A Worksheet for Making Global Assessments
Exhibit 9-8. A Worksheet to Identify Success Factors
Exhibit 9-9. An Individual Potential Assessment Form
Exhibit 10-1. A Sample Replacement Chart Format: Typical Succession Planning
and Management Inventory for the Organization
Exhibit 10-2. Succession Planning and Management Inventory by Position
Exhibit 10-4. A Worksheet for Preparing Learning Objectives Based on Individual
Development Needs
Exhibit 10-5. A Worksheet for Identifying the Resources Necessary to Support
Developmental Experiences
Exhibit 10-7. A Sample Individual Development Plan
Exhibit 10-8. Methods of Grooming Individuals for Advancement
Exhibit 10-9. Key Strategies for Internal Development
Exhibit 11-1. Deciding When Replacing a Key Job Incumbent Is Unnecessary:
A Flowchart
Exhibit 11-2. A Worksheet for Identifying Alternatives to the Traditional Approach
to Succession Planning and Management
Exhibit 12-4. A Worksheet for Brainstorming When and How to Use Online
and High-Tech Methods
Exhibit 13-3. A Worksheet for Identifying Appropriate Ways to Evaluate Succession
Planning and Management in an Organization
Exhibit 13-4. A Sample ‘‘Incident Report’’ for Succession Planning and Management
Exhibit 13-5. Steps for Completing a Program Evaluation of a Succession Planning
and Management Program
Exhibit 13-6. A Checksheet for Conducting a Program Evaluation for the Succession
Planning and Management Program
Exhibit 14-1. A Worksheet to Structure Your Thinking about Predictions for
Succession Planning and Management in the Future
Exhibit 14-2. A Worksheet to Structure Your Thinking about Alternative Approaches
to Meeting Succession Needs
Exhibit 14-7. Important Characteristics of Career Planning and Management
Programs
Exhibit 14-8. An Assessment Sheet for Integrating Career Planning and Management
Programs with Succession Planning and Management Programs

What’s on the CD?
389
Also:
▲ Effective Succession Planning: A Fully Customizable Leader Guide for
The Manager’s Role in Succession Planning
▲ Effective Succession Planning: A Fully Customizable Participant Guide
for The Manager’s Role in Succession Planning
▲ PowerPoint Slides to Accompany The Manager’s Role in Succession
Planning
▲ Assessment Instrument for Use with The Manager’s Role in Succession
Planning
▲ Executive Assessment Instrument for Use with The Manager’s Role in
Succession Planning
▲ PowerPoint Slides to Accompany Executive Briefing on Succession Planning
▲ Frequently-Asked Questions About Succession Planning (from the
Book) for Use with the Executive Briefing on Succession Planning
▲ Effective Succession Planning: A Fully Customizable Leader Guide for
Mentoring from A to Z
▲ Effective Succession Planning: A Fully Customizable Participant Guide
for Mentoring from A to Z
▲ PowerPoint Slides to Accompany Mentoring from A to Z

This page intentionally left blank

INDEX
ABCD model, 118–121
accomplishment, evidence of, 240
accountability, 345–346
accounting, 53
acquisitions, 313, 329
action learning, 74, 255–256
action plans
communication of, 147–160
components of effective, 156–157
preparation of, 156–158
technological support for, 280, 283
active roles, 128, 129
Adams, James L., on problem-solving, 257–258
adopted children, 154
adopters, 119–120
advancement, 36
Advance Organizer, 1–4
advisory boards, 362
affirmative action, 149
Aftercare program, 351
Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA)
(1967), 150, 154
agenda, 231, 283
aging workforce, xviii, xx, 45, 122
agriculture, 152
alternative corporate headquarters, xvii
AMACOM, see American Management Association
ambassadors, 345
American Management Association (AMACOM), 69,
114
American Society for Training and Development
(ASTD), 17, 20, 114
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) (1990), 153,
154, 185, 187
anecdotal evaluation, 296, 300
anecdotes, 96
application service provider (ASP) model, 340
appraisals of individual performance, see performance
appraisals
appreciative inquiry (AI), 77
‘‘Ask, formulate, and establish’’ approach, 132,
136, 138
assessment(s)
with assessment centers, 221–222
of current practices, 98–104
of current problems, 96–97
full-circle, multirater, see full-circle, multirater
assessments
of future individual potential, 80
of future work/people requirements, 80
of individual potential, see individual potential
assessments
of performance, see performance appraisals
of present work/people requirements, 80,
184–189
with work portfolios, 222–224
assessment centers, 221–222
Austin, Michael J., on reason for transition,
343–344
automated talent inventory systems, 289
average performers, 84
avoidable turnover, 228
awareness building, 126
awareness stage, 119, 121
balance, work/family, 323
Bardach, Eugene, on work of dirty-minded implementors,
348
Barr, Michael, 354–360
Baumrin, Sara, on dismissals, 343
behavioral event interviewing, 90
behaviorally anchored rating scales (BARS),
197–198
behavior level of training, 293–294
Bell, Charlie, 14, 15
Ben & Jerry’s, 70
best practices, 31–32, 113–118
best-practice SP&M programs, xxiii
blackbox, 119
bonus plans, 122–123
Boston Consulting Group, 213
bottom-line value, 105–107
bottom-up approach, 30, 32
Brache, A., 258
Brown, Ron, 16, 67
‘‘bureaucratic kinship system,’’ 19
business case for SP&M, 333–334
Business Decisions, Inc., 273
business process reengineering, 258
Calhoun, David, 12
Camp, Robert C., on benchmarking, 113
Cantalupo, Jim, 14, 15
career development, 323–327
career maps, 36
career path meetings, 75
career planning meetings, 75
Carlisle, Kenneth E., on job/task analysis, 185
catastrophe, 16
391

392 I NDEX
Champy, James, on business process reengineering,
258
change agents, 119–120
Chief Executive magazine, 32
childbirth, 151
children, 154
China, 49, 318, 319
citizenship, 152
Civil Rights Act (1964), 149, 151, 154
civil service systems, 51, 321–322
clarification of high-level replacement needs, 57
Click XG Workforce, 273
‘‘cloning the incumbent,’’ 258
closed communication strategy, 159
closed SP&M, 34
Coca-Cola, 15, 114
codes of conduct, 49
Cohen Machinery Co., 360
collective bargaining, 148
collectivistic cultures, 49
Collins, Jim, on good-to-great, 354, 359
combination approach, 32–33
committees, 162
communication, 157–160, 361
communication strategy, 147, 154
company-specific competency models, 287
The Competence Expert, 286
competency assessment, 82
Competency Coach for Windows, 286
competency development strategies, 86–89
competitive job searches, 51
competitive skill inventories of high-potential
workers outside organization, 38–39
complex methods, 272–273
conditions, learning, 238
conference calls, 280, 283
Congressional Accountability Act (1995), 154
consultants, 240, 242, 312, 361–362
consulting, 39
content (term), 135
continuous SP&M, 33, 70
contractors, 148–151, 153
Contract Work Hours Safety Standards Act (1962),
149
Cooper, Kenneth Carlton, 286
coordinative role, 142
coordinators, 161, 162
Corning, 233
corporate culture-specific development strategy,
87–89
corporate governance crisis, xix
corporate headquarters, alternative, xvii
corporate politics, 69, 72–73
cost-benefit analysis, 107
Council of Institutional Investors, 122
counseling managers, 172–174
cover letters, 101
creativity, 17
crises, 96, 104
criteria, learning, 238
critical incident analysis, 215
criticality, 265–266
critical questioning, 58
critical turnover, 24, 228, 314
cross-gender mentoring, 255
crown prince phenomenon, 157, 322
cultural differences, 47–50
culture, corporate, see corporate culture
customer satisfaction, 294
DACUM method, see Developing A Curriculum
method
Daft, Douglas, 15
Davis-Bacon Act (1931), 148
deadwood, 214–215
death, 14–15, 16
dedicated responsibility, 57
Deegan, Arthur X., II, on selection of key position,
235
degree programs, 245, 247
delegating down, 313
delegating up, 313
Deloitte, 313
Deming, W. Edwards, on employee performance
appraisals, 193
demographic changes, xviii, xx–xxi, 45, 318
demotion (moving people down in organization),
36
department managers, 336
departures, 314
derailment competency studies, 84
Descriptions Now!, 284
Developing A Curriculum (DACUM) method,
187–189
developmental dilemma, 255
developmental gaps, 80, 287–288
development in current position, 37
development meetings, 75, 231
dimensions/activity rating approach, 197
Dinkins, David, 350
direct expenses, 107
direct training, 171
‘‘dirty-minded implementors,’’ 348
disabilities, 150, 153
disasters, xvii
discretion, amount of individual, 34–35
discrimination, 72, 149, 150, 152, 153
Disney, 122
dissatisfaction sources, 314
dissemination, degree of, 34
diversity, 19, 27–28, 36
divisional meetings, 75
document distribution, 279
document storage and retrieval, 279
Dole Food Company Inc., 337–341
domain, 119
domino effect, 312
Dormant, Diane, 118, 119
dossiers, 223
double loop learning, 13
Dow Chemical Company, 70–72, 233
downsizing, 18–19, 29, 36, 45, 46
Drotter, Stephen J., on lack of mission clarification,
130
Drucker, Peter, on tomorrow’s management, xxii
dual career ladders, 37
early tracking systems, 314
Economic Dislocation and Worker Adjustment Assistance
Act (1988), 153
education, employee, 24–25
education meetings, 75
effective placements, 294
Eisner, Michael, 122

Index
393
elderly people, 318
e-learning, 290
Eli Lilly and Company, 89
elimination of work, 313
e-mail surveys, 101
employee buyouts, 36
employee development programs, xxiii, 25
employee hoarding, 234
employee performance appraisal meetings, 75
Employee Polygraph Protection Act (1988), 153
Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA)
(1974), 151
employee rights, 148
Employers Reinsurance, 12
Employment and Training Administration, 152
employment contract, 46
employment laws, 145, 147–154
Employment Standards Administration, 153
empowered individual potential assessments,
220–221
enthusiasm, 291
entry (moving people into organization), 35–36
environmental scanning, 204, 205
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
(EEOC), 145, 147, 149–151, 153, 154
Equal Pay Act (1963), 149
Ernest, Elaine H., 354–360
essential job function, 185
Estate Archetypes Inc., 363
ethics, 328
ethics programs, 49
Europe, 50
evaluation
of learning and outcomes, 242–244
of SP&M, 81
evaluation of SP&M, 292–307
anecdotal, 296, 300
definition of, 292
guidelines for, 297–298
hierarchy of, 293–296
interest in, 292–293
key questions governing, 293
periodic, 301
programmatic, 301–307
technological support for, 290
worksheet for identifying appropriate, 299
evidence of accomplishment, 240
executive coaching, 253
Executive Order 11246 (1965), 149
Executrack, 273
exemplary performers, 84–87, 200–201, 213–215
exit interview systems, 314
expenses, 107
external benchmarking, 56
external talent, 70
external talent pools, 68
‘‘Facilitate interactive debate’’ approach, 135, 138
facilitators’ roles, 128, 129
Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) (1947), 148
Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) (1991), 154
‘‘family heritage,’’ 50
family psychology, 53
Family Ties program, 350, 351
family/work balance, 323
farm labor, 152
Farquhar, Katherine, 343, 344
Fayol’s fourteen points of management, 10
Federal Aviation Administration, 338
federal contractors, 148–151, 153
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, 151
Federal Senior Executive Service, 343
feedback, 191–192, 252
The Financial Executive, 54
firings, 36
first generation of SP&M, 59, 66
Fitz-enz, Jac, on making case for SP&M, 105
flexible staffing, 266
flexible strategies, 309, 312–317
FMLA (Family and Medical Leave Act) (1991), 154
focused attention, 56
Ford, 52
formal mentoring, 58, 254
Formtool, 290
Fortune magazine, 89
40-hour workweek, 149
fourth generation of SP&M, 68, 147
France, 318, 320
Fredrickson, James W., on dismissals, 343
free-form appraisals, 195
frequently asked questions (FAQs), 331–336
fringe benefits, 150
fully successful performers, 85
Fulmer, Robert M., on best practices, 31
functional meetings, 75
future competency models, 208–210
future competency studies, 84
future individual potential assessment, 80
future key positions, 203–212
future leaders, 31
future of SP&M, 308–330
acquisitions in, 329
career development integration in, 323–327
ethics/values in, 328
flexible strategies in, 309, 312–317
global impact on, 318–321
in government, academia, nonprofits, 321–322
leveraging talent in, 328–329
manager’s role in, 323, 328
openness in, 322
retention policies/procedures integrated in, 314
risk management in, 329
selection decisions integrated in, 328
technological innovations in, 321
work/family balance in, 323
worksheets to structure thinking about, 310–
311, 315–317
future-oriented competency modeling, 286
future-oriented job and task analysis, 207–209
future-oriented rapid results assessment, 210–212
future potential, 57, 189
future rapid results assessment, 209–212
future scenarios, 204, 207, 208
futuring approach, 22, 24
Gallant, Jefferey, on family businesses, 362
gambler’s fallacy, 179
gender, 149
General Electric (GE), 11–13, 15, 114, 233
generalized SP&M, 34
General Motors, 114
generals, 345
generic competency development strategy, 86–87
Genesis award, 71

394 I NDEX
Gent, Sir Christopher, 15
Gibney, Jim, 360–361
Giuliani, Rudolph, 350
global assessment, 215, 216
Global Business Network, 286
global impact, 318–321
global issues, 48–50
global rating approach, 196
global recruitment, 313
Goizueta, Roberto, 15
Golden, Karen A., on lack of integration, 112
Goodkind, Labaton, Rudoff & Sucharow, 362
Gordon, Gil E., on succession, 343
governance crisis, xix
governors, 345
Greenberg, Jack, 14
Greenblatt, Milton, on anticipatory stage of succession,
343
greenmail, 322
Greensboro Regional Realtors Association (GRRA),
354–360
Gridley, John D., on growing importance of HRP,
24
group process, 232
groupware, 280, 286
‘‘guerrilla warfare,’’ 170
Haire, M., on types of job movements, 35
halo effect, 72, 215
Hambrick, Donald C., on dismissals, 343
Hammer, Michael, on business process reengineering,
258
hands-on trial stage, 120, 121
hardwiring, 349–350
headcount, 30
health standards, 150
Herzlinger, Regina, on intergenerational equity,
345
Hewitt, 338, 339, 340
Hickey, Will, on negligence of systemic succession
planning, 49
high performers (HiPers), xviii
high-tech methods, 272
Hill, Anita, 255
HiPers (high performers), xviii
HiPos, see high potentials
hiring from outside, 309, 312
‘‘hiring off the street,’’ 35–36
historical studies, 126
Hogan Assessment Systems, 201
‘‘holding themselves for ransom,’’ 158
hole (key position), 181, 228, 229
homosocial reproduction, 19, 182
Honeywell, 12
horizontal advancement, 199
horizontal loading, 37
horn effect, 72, 215
‘‘horror stories,’’ 96
HR information systems (HRIS), 86, 289
HRMS software, 340
HRSoft, 273
HR systems, xix
human capital management (HCM), xviii, 17–18,
86
Human Capital Management (software), 273
human capital management initiatives, 51
Human Resource Management, 343
human resource management (HRM), xxiii
human resource planning (HRP), 24
Human Resource Planning Society, 114
Human Resources Conference, 69
human resource strategy, 111–112
Hunt, James, on coaching, 252
IBM, 114, 209
IDPs, see individual development plans
Immelt, Jeffrey R., 11–13
Immigration and Naturalization Service, 152
Immigration Reform and Control Act (IRCA)
(1986), 152
incentives, 314
incident reports, 296, 300
increased responsibility, 36
indirect expenses, 107
individual development planning, 227
individualists, 49
individual learning plan, 192
individual performance appraisals, see performance
appraisals
individuals, SP&M role of, 336
informal approach, 98–99
informal mentoring, 254
informal surveys, 99–101
infrastructure, 143
in-house training, 166–169, 245, 248
innovation, sustained, 341–352
inplacement, 28, 37
insourcing, 312
institutional memory, xviii, 13, 17
integrated retention policies/procedures, 314
intellectual capital, 25, 46–47
interactive and multimedia distribution and delivery,
280
‘‘interactive debate,’’ 135, 138
interactive methods, 272–273
intergenerational equity, 345
internal development, 242, 244–251
internal promotion policy formulation, 232–235
internal promotions, appropriateness of, 233–234
internal successor development, 227–256
with action learning, 255–256
with coaching, 252
with executive coaching, 253
how-based strategies for, 251
with IDPs, 235–244
with leadership development programs, 251
with mentoring, 253–255
policy formulation for, 232–235
strategies for, 242, 244–251
testing bench strength for, 227–233
what-based strategies for, 244, 250
when-based strategies for, 250
where-based strategies for, 250–251
who-based strategies for, 244
why-based strategies for, 251
internal talent pools, 68
International Society for Performance Improvement
(ISPI), 20
Ivester, Douglas, 15
Jacobs, Carl, 362–363
J.G. Industries, Inc., 360, 361
job analysis, 184, 207–209
job content coaches, 253

Index
395
job description, 184, 283–284
job forecasting, 285–286
job movements, 35–37
job performance, 57
job posting, 36, 234–235
job rotations, 37–39, 74, 245, 250
jobs, positions vs., 184
job security, 151
job sharing, 39
job tenure, xxi
Job Training Partnership Act (1982), 152
joint labor-management activities, 151
Kaihla, Paul, on psychological assessments, 201
Kaiser, Marc, 338, 339
Kanter, Rosabeth Moss, on homosocial reproduction,
19, 182
Katzenbach, Jon R., 347
Kelleher, Herb, 89
Kern, Larry, 339, 341
Kets de Vries, Manfred F. R., on reluctance to deal
with succession planning, 345
key people, loss of, 125–126
key position selection, 235
kickoff meetings, 75, 162–163
Kilts, James, 15
Kirkpatrick, Donald, 293
knowledge management, 46–47
Korn, Lester, on human resource asset base, 18
Korn/Ferry International, 18, 122
Labat, Lisa, on business needs, 339
Labor-Management Cooperation Act (1978), 151
Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act
(Landrum-Griffin Act) (1959), 148–149
labor relations, 151
lateral transfer, 36–37
laws, employment, 145, 147–154
layoffs, 36, 153
leader-driven individual potential assessments,
217, 219
leadership continuity, 35–39
leadership development programs, 251
learning contract, 235
learning evaluation, 242–244
learning level of training, 293
learning needs diagnosis, 235, 238
learning objectives, 238, 239
learning resources, 238–241
learning through action, 255–256
Legal Services Corporations, 343
Leibman, Michael, on dynamic environment, 41
leveraging talent, 328–329
lie detector tests, 153
life insurance, 363
‘‘like me’’ bias, 73
listening, 252
‘‘loaned executives,’’ 313
localization strategy, 320
long-term competencies, 58
long-term development, 70
loyalty, 45–46
Mager, Robert F., on learning objectives, 238
Mahler, Walter R., on lack of mission clarification,
130
management by objectives (MBO), 198
management development and compensation
committee (MDCC), 11, 12
management development (MD) programs, xxiii,
xxiv
management track, 37
mandated SP&M, 35
Manzini, Andrew O., on growing importance of
HRP, 24
market-driven approach, 22
Marshall, Thurgood, on being black in America, 27
McClelland, David, on standardized testing, 82
McDonald’s, 14–15
McKenna, Andrew, 14
McLagan’s Flexible Approach, 187
McNerney, James, 11–13
measurement, 71, 105–107
mental tryout stage, 120, 121
mentoring, 58, 245, 249, 253–255, 328, 329,
359–360
mentors, 77, 254
middle management, 18–19, 67–68
Middleton, Robert, on family succession, 361
minimum wage, 148–150
mining industry, 150, 151
modeling behaviors, 252
monarchs, 345
money resources, 238
morale, 28, 36
motivation, 221
Motorola, 38, 114
multiculturalism, 19
multinational corporations (MNCs), 48
musical chairs effect, 312
Myers Briggs Type Indicator (MBTI), 201
Nardelli, Robert, 11–13
National Academy of Public Administration (NAPA),
342–343
National Labor Relations Act (1947), 148
national origin, 149, 152
necessity question, 258–268
need for speed, 42, 44
needs-driven SP&M, 56, 70
Neo, 201
Netmeeting, 280, 283
netphone, 280
network charting, 182–183
New York City Department of Juvenile Justice, 342,
347–351
nondirective roles, 128, 129
noninteractive methods, 272, 273
objectives, strategic, 84
Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) (1970),
150
Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
150
off-the-job degree programs, 245, 247
off-the-job public seminars, 245, 247, 248
older workers, 318–319
Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (1990), 154
ONet, 284
online methods, 272, 321
on-site degree programs, 245, 247
on-the-job training, 245, 248, 249
open communication strategy, 159
openness, 322

396 I NDEX
open SP&M, 34
opportunities, seizing, 104–106
Optum, Inc., 224
organizational analysis, 204, 206
Organizational Dynamics, 89
organizational effectiveness, 151
organizational meetings, 75
organizational outcomes, 294
organizational redesign, 37–38
organizational requirements, 108–110
organizational results, 296
organizational strategy, 111
organizational structure, 204
organization chart, 181
OrgPlus, 290
original data collection for policy formulation, 279
Orwell, George, on equality, 50
outsourcing, 38, 265–266, 312
overstaffing, 38
overtime, 39, 148, 149
paperwork, 74–75
participant roles, 129
participation, 56
participative assessment, 219–220
part-time employment, 39
passive roles, 128, 129
patience, 291
Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration, 151,
152
pension plans, 151, 152
PeopleClik, 273
People Manager, 288
‘‘people problems,’’ 173–174
people resources, 238
PeopleTrak, 288
performance, future potential vs. present, 189
performance contract, 235
performance management, 193, 194
Performance Now!, 285
periodic evaluation, 301
periodic review meetings, 163
periodic SP&M, 33
personality assessments, 201
pigeonholing, 72
Pilat, 273
Pilat NAI, 338, 340
plan for improvement, 192
planned job rotation programs, 245, 250
planned mentoring programs, 245, 249
planned on-the-job training, 245, 249
planning, training and, 164–169
plant closures, 153
policy writing, 136–138
politics, corporate, 69, 72–73
population, 318–319
Porter, Gordon, 363
portfolios, work, 222–224
position analysis, 185, 187
potential assessment meetings, 75
potential assessments, individual, see individual
potential assessments
Pregnancy Discrimination Act (PDA) (1978), 151
present competency studies, 84
present job performance, 57
present work requirements, see work requirements
primogeniture, 52
‘‘Prince Charles syndrome,’’ 15
priority setting, 143–147
Private Industry Councils, 152
procedure writing, 136–138, 280, 283
process (term), 135
process coaches, 253
process consultation, 253
process improvement, 258, 265
process redesign, 38
professional positions, 141
profitability, xxii
program coordinators, 161
programmatic evaluation, 301–307
program progress, 294
progress in place (development in current position),
37
promotion (moving people up in organization), 36
promotion from within, 227, 232–234
proposal meetings, 162
protégés, 254
psychological assessments, 201
public sector case studies, 341–352
purpose statements, see mission statements
Pygmalion effect, 72, 193
question marks (term), 214
quick-fix attitudes, 73
race, 149
Rainey, Hal G., on transition management, 343
Ramanujam, Vasudevan, on lack of integration, 112
rapid results assessment, 189, 209–212
reaction level of training, 293
readiness to assume duties, 233–234
readjustment, 153
reallocating duties within organization, 265
real-time education, 74
recency bias, 72, 215
recognition of positive performance, 252
‘‘Recommend and listen’’ approach, 132–135, 138
‘‘reduction in cycle time,’’ 42
Rehabilitation Act (1973), 150
reinventing retirement, 266, 269, 270
religion, 149
reluctance to ‘‘deal’’ with succession, 344–345
reorganization, 312
replacement charts, 36, 228–230, 290
replacement needs identification, 24–25
replacements, necessity question about, 258–268
researching secondary information, 277–279
resistance to SP&M, 97
resources, learning, 238–241
responsibility, increased, 36
results measurement, 105
retention policies/procedures, 314
retention programs, 45
retention strategies, 25–27, 49
retiree base, 39, 266, 269, 270, 314
retirement age, 45
retirement benefits, 151
retirement dates, 20, 104, 125
retirement eligibility, 125
retraining, 153
retreats, 160–162, 347–348
return-on-investment (ROI), 334
Revans, Reg, 255
rewards, 46, 328

Index
397
Rhodes, Frank, 12, 13
rifle approach, 24
‘‘right to sue’’ letters, 147
risk analysis, 20, 125–126
risk management, 16, 329
role clarification, 142
role incumbents (role senders), 127, 128
role receivers, 127, 128
roles
of CEOs/managers, 142
clarifying program, 126–130
of HR department, 142–143
of individuals, 143
of stakeholders, 143
understanding, 126–128
role senders (role incumbents), 127, 128
role theory, 127–130
roll-out approach, 59, 147, 154
Rosen, Ned, on succession, 343
Rothwell, William, on best practices, 32
Rummler, G., 258
safety standards, 150
Sarbanes-Oxley Act (2002), xviii, 49, 122
Sarin, Arun, 15
scandals, xvii–xviii, 47
scenario analysis, 207
scenario planning, 84, 286
Schall, Ellen, 341–354
Schein, Edgar, 253
scope, 33–34
seasonal agricultural workers, 152
secondary information, 277–279
second generation of SP&M, 66, 67
secrecy, 34
security, 329
selection decisions, 328
self-concern stage, 119, 121
seller’s market for skills, 44–45
seminars, 245, 247, 248
seniority, xxi, 234
Senior Leaders Program, 313
September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, xvii, 16, 329
Service Contract Act (1965), 149–150
seven-pointed star model, 78, 79
sex, 149
shadowing, 182–183
Shiloh Nurseries, 362–363
Silverman, Marc, on family businesses, 361–362
simple methods, 272, 273
site visits, 113–114
skills, seller’s market for, 44–45
Smith, Douglas K., 347
Society for Human Resources Management
(SHRM), 20, 114
Softscape, 273
soft skills technologies, 320–321
Southwest Airlines, 89
specialized SP&M, 33–34
spirituality, 323
sponsors, 58, 254
spouses, 53
stars, 213, 214
Stebbins, Michael, 362–363
stereotyping, 72
strategic alliances, 313
strategic goals and objectives, 84
Strategic Initiatives Inc., 361
strategic planning, xxiii, 20–24
strategic thinking, xxiii
success factor analysis, 215–218
Success Factors (company), 273
Succession (software), 273
succession management, 10
succession planning and management (SP&M), xx,
7–40
at all levels, xxii, 57
amount of individual discretion in, 34–35
and appreciative inquiry, 77
assessing current state of, 95–104
assessment of need for, 1–4
assessment questionnaire for, 64–66
benefits of, xxii, 335
best practices/approaches to, 30–35
business case for, 18–20
characteristics of effective, 56–63
defining, 10, 13
demonstrating need for, 101, 104–107
deploying, 31
direction of, 30, 32–33
dissemination of, 34
GE example of, 11–13
and HCM, 17–18
importance of, 98
interest in, 332
and leadership continuity, 35–39
leadership focus of, xxi
life cycle of, 59, 66–69
McDonald’s example of, 14–15
ministudies of, 7–9
need for, xxii–xxiii
performance appraisals linked to, 194–199
planning component of, 33
problems affecting, 69, 72–76, 334–335
reasons for, 20–30
replacement planning vs., 16
resistance to, 97
scope of, 33–34
talent management vs., 16–17
timing of, 33
workforce planning vs., 16
and WSTC, 76
Succession Pulse, 273
successors, 57
sudden death, 14–15, 16
supervisory positions, 139
supremacy clause (of U.S. Constitution), 145
‘‘survivor’s syndrome,’’ 28
‘‘sustained innovation,’’ 341–342
systematic planning, 33
systematic SP&M, 57
Taft-Hartley Act (1947), 148
talent, 13, 70
talent development, xviii
talent inventories, 288–289
talent management, xviii, 16–17
Talent Management (software), 273
talent-pool approach, 51
target group identification, 138–142
task analysis, 184, 207–209
task inventory, 184
team-based management, 74

398 I NDEX
technical positions, 37, 141
technical succession planning, xix
technological innovations, 321
technological support, 272–291
applications for, 276
brainstorming worksheet for, 281–282
closing developmental gaps with, 287–288
competency-modeling with, 86
evaluating SP&M program with, 290
formulating policy/procedures/action plans with,
280, 283
future work requirements determination with,
285–286
hierarchy of applications for, 276–282
individual potential assessment with, 287
maintaining talent inventories with, 288–289
for paperwork, 74
performance appraisal with, 284–285
present work requirements assessment with,
283–284
rating form for, 274–276
specialized competencies required for, 290–291
vendors of, 273
temping, 39
temporary replacements, 312
temporary trading of personnel, 38
terminations, 29, 30, 36, 153, see also moving people
out of organization
terrorism, 122
Teslik, Sarah, on Disney SP&M, 122
third generation of SP&M, 67–68, 147
third-party consultants, 162
Thomas, Clarence, 255
360-degree assessments, 77, 86, 287, see also fullcircle,
multirater assessments
time frame (for IDPs), 235
time resources, 238, 240
timing, 33
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act (1964), 149, 151
Tobias, Randall, 89
‘‘Top 20 Companies for Leaders’’ study, 338
top-down approach, 22, 30
top performers, values clarification of, 90–91
Total Quality Management (TQM), 113, 193
trading personnel temporarily, 38, 313
training, education, and developmental meetings,
75
training on SP&M, 164–171
training support, 290
trait rating approach, 196
Trak-IT HR, 289
transfers, 312
‘‘transformational change,’’ 95
triangulation, 183
trust, 220
turbulence, 346–347
two-in-the-box arrangements, 38
unavoidable turnover, 228
Uniform Guidelines on Employee Selection Procedures,
147
union representation, 148
unions, 148–149
United Kingdom, 318, 319
United States, 318
unplanned job rotation programs, 245, 250
unplanned mentoring programs, 245, 249
unplanned on-the-job training, 245, 248
unsystematic planning, 33
uproar method, 180–181
upward mobility, 36
U.S. Agencies Credit Union, 363–365
U.S. Constitution, 145
U.S. Department of Health and Human Services,
150
U.S. Department of Justice, 152
U.S. Department of Labor (DOL), 148–154, 185
U.S. Masters tournament, 12
U.S. Secretary of Commerce, 16, 67
U.S. General Accounting Office, 17–18
vacancy in key position, 180–181
validation of evidence, 240
values, 47, 87, 89–91, 328
values clarification, 87, 89–91
values statements, 89, 199
verified SP&M, 35
vertical advancement, 195, 199
vertical loading, 37
veterans, 151
videoconferencing, 280, 283
Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act
(VEVRAA) (1974), 151
visibility, 73
visual aids, 126
Vizzini, Kelly, on work samples, 224
Vodafone, 15
voluntary suspension programs, 28–29
voluntary turnover, 314
Wage and Hour Division (DOL), 148–150, 152–154
Wagner Act (1947), 148
Warner Electric, 360
Warren Pike Associates, 360–362
Wechsler, Barton, on transition management, 343
Weintraub, Joseph, on coaching, 252
what-based strategies, 244, 250
‘‘what if’’ scenarios, 126
Whistleblower Protection Statutes (1989), 153
who-based strategies, 244
whole systems transformational change (WSTC),
76
wills, 53
W.M. Steele Co., 360
Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification Act
(WARN) (1988), 153
work/family balance, 323
Workforce Performance Management, 273
workforce planning, xviii, 16, 51
workforce reductions, 29
workhorses, 213–214
workload measurement, 105
workplace learning and performance (WLP), xxiii
work portfolios, 222–224
work processes, 204
work requirements meetings, 75
work samples, 223
written policy and procedures, 136–138
written surveys, 101–104
Xerox, 114

ABOUT THE AUTHOR
William J. Rothwell is Professor-in-Charge of Workforce Education and Development
in the Department of Learning and Performance Systems in the College
of Education on the University Park campus of The Pennsylvania State
University. He leads a graduate emphasis in workplace learning and performance.
He is also President of Rothwell & Associates, Inc. (see www.rothwellassociates.com),
a full-service private consulting firm that specializes in all facets
of succession planning and management and related HR issues.
Rothwell completed a B.A. in English at Illinois State University, an M.A.
(and all courses for the doctorate) in English at the University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, an M.B.A. at the University of Illinois at Springfield, and a
Ph.D. degree with a specialization in employee training at the University of
Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He holds life accreditation as a Senior Professional
of Human Resources (SPHR) and was the first U.S. citizen awarded
trainer certification (CTDP) by the Canadian Society for Training and Development
(CSTD).
Before entering academe in 1993, Rothwell had twenty years of experience
as an HR practitioner, serving first as Training Director for the Illinois Office of
Auditor General and later as Assistant Vice President and Management Development
Director for The Franklin Life Insurance Company, at that time a
wholly owned subsidiary of a Fortune 50 multinational company.
Best-known for his extensive and high-profile work in succession management,
Rothwell is a frequent speaker or keynoter at conferences and seminars
around the world. He has authored, coauthored, edited, or coedited numerous
books, book chapters, and articles. Among his most recent publications
are Beyond Training and Development, 2nd ed. (AMACOM, 2005), Practicing
Organization Development, 2nd ed. (Pfeiffer, 2005), the current ASTD competency
study to define the workplace learning and performance field entitled
Mapping the Future (with P. Bernthal and others, ASTD, 2004), Competency-
Based Human Resource Management (with D. Dubois, Davies-Black, 2004),
Linking Training to Performance (with P. Gerity and E. Gaertner, American
Association of Community Colleges, 2004), The Strategic Development of Talent
(with H. Kazanas, HRD Press, 2004), Mastering the Instructional Design
Process, 3rd ed. (with H. Kazanas, Pfefifer, 2004), Improving On-The-Job Train-
399

400 A BOUT THE A UTHOR
ing, 2nd ed. (with H. Kazanas, Pfeiffer, 2004), What CEOs Expect from Corporate
Training: Building Workplace Learning and Performance Initiatives That
Advance Organizational Goals (with J. Lindholm and W. Wallick, AMACOM,
2003), Planning and Managing Human Resources,2nded.(withH.C.Kazanas,
HRD Press, 2003), Creating Sales Training and Development Programs: A
Competency-Based Approach to Building Sales Ability (with W. Donahue and
J. Park, Greenwood Press, 2002), The Workplace Learner: How to Align Training
Initiatives with Individual Learning Competencies (AMACOM, 2002), and
Building Effective Technical Training: How to Develop Hard Skills Within Organizations
(with J. Benkowski, Pfeiffer, 2002).
Rothwell is the U.S. editor of the International Journal of Training and
Development (Blackwell’s), an academic journal on which he works with editorial
counterparts in Europe and Asia. He is also a book series coeditor, with
Roland Sullivan and Kris Quade, of the Wiley/Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer book series
Practicing Organization Change and Development; a book series coeditor,
with Rita Richey and Tim Spannaus, of the Wiley/Jossey-Bass/Pfeiffer book series
Using Technology in Training and Learning; and a book series coeditor,
with Victoria Marsick and Andrea Ellinger, of the AMACOM book series Adult
Learning Theory.